19th OECD-WTO-UNCTAD report on G20 trade and investment … · 2018-07-04 · UNCTAD cover trade and investment measures implemented by G20 members during the period from mid-October

4 July 2018

REPORTS ON G20 TRADE AND INVESTMENT MEASURES1

(MID-OCTOBER 2017 TO MID-MAY 2018)

1 These reports are issued under the responsibility of the Director-General of the WTO, the

Secretary-General of the OECD, and the Secretary-General of UNCTAD. They have no legal effect on the rights and obligations of Members of the WTO, OECD, or UNCTAD. The inclusion of any measure in these reports or in their Annexes implies no judgement by the WTO, OECD, or UNCTAD Secretariats on whether or not such measure, or its intent, is protectionist in nature. Moreover, nothing in the reports implies any judgement, either direct or indirect, as to the consistency of any measure with the provisions of any WTO, OECD, or UNCTAD agreements or any provisions thereof.

Joint Summary on G20 Trade and Investment Measures

We are pleased to submit our reports on G20 trade and investment measures. These reports delivered today under the mandate provided by G20 Leaders in 2008 to the WTO, OECD and UNCTAD cover trade and investment measures implemented by G20 members during the period

from mid-October 2017 to mid-May 2018. The nineteenth WTO Report on G20 trade measures covers new trade and trade-related measures implemented by G20 economies during the review period. It reveals a number of important trends in global trade policy making. While G20 economies continue to implement trade-facilitating measures, the more worrying trend during this period is the increase in trade-restrictive measures which has come at a time of increasing trade tensions and associated rhetoric. This should be of

real concern to the international community. At a juncture where the global economy is finally beginning to generate sustained economic momentum following the global financial crisis, the uncertainty created by a proliferation of trade actions could place economic recovery in jeopardy. The multilateral trading system was built to resolve such problems and it has the tools to do so again. However, further escalation could carry

potentially large risks for the system itself. Its resilience and functionality in the face of these challenges will depend on each and every one of its Members. The G20 economies should use all means at their disposal to de-escalate the situation and promote further trade recovery. Investment policy measures that G20 Members have taken in the reporting period also show a mixed picture. While some point towards greater openness for foreign investment and the easing of conditions for international capital flows, especially where enterprise investment is concerned,

others introduce new investment restrictions. The majority of G20 Members has not taken any investment policy measures at all. In particular, investment policies related to national security continue to attract significant and growing attention in and beyond the G20 membership. The scope of transactions that are seen to impair national security is widening and investment screening mechanisms also evolve. While legitimate when confined to genuine national security concerns, these policies require close

monitoring to avoid being used as disguised restrictions to international investment. The overall continued openness of G20 Members to international investment is a positive signal

and economies are likely to benefit from such policies, if embodied in a sound regulatory framework. The commitment to open, transparent and conducive investment policies is even more valuable and important at a time when the multilateral system of international economic relations

is under strain. Angel Gurría Roberto Azevêdo Mukhisa Kituyi

Secretary-General Director-General Secretary-General OECD WTO UNCTAD Attachments: Trade Report; Investment Report; Summary of trade and trade-related measures taken since October 2008 (made available separately); Consolidated inventory of investment measures introduced since October 2008 (also made available separately).

4 July 2018

REPORT ON G20 TRADE MEASURES

(MID-OCTOBER 2017 TO MID-MAY 2018)

Table of contents

KEY FINDINGS ................................................................................................................. 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 6

1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 8

2 RECENT ECONOMIC AND TRADE DEVELOPMENTS ........................................................ 9

2.1 Overview .................................................................................................................... 9

2.2 Economic Developments ..............................................................................................10

2.3 Merchandise Trade .....................................................................................................12

2.4 Trade in Commercial Services ......................................................................................12

2.5 Trade Forecast and Economic Outlook ...........................................................................15

3 TRADE AND TRADE-RELATED POLICY DEVELOPMENTS .............................................. 21

3.1 Overview of Trends Identified During the Period under Review .........................................21

3.2 Trade Remedies .........................................................................................................28

3.3 Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) ...................................................................39

3.4 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) .................................................................................42

3.5 Trade Concerns Raised in Other Bodies .........................................................................47

3.6 Policy Developments in Agriculture ...............................................................................53

3.7 General Economic Support ...........................................................................................60

3.8 Other Selected Trade Policy Issues ...............................................................................61

4 POLICY DEVELOPMENTS IN TRADE IN SERVICES ...................................................... 72

5 POLICY DEVELOPMENTS IN TRADE AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY .......................... 75

ANNEX 1 MEASURES FACILITATING TRADE ................................................................... 78

ANNEX 2 TRADE REMEDIES ............................................................................................ 87

ANNEX 3 OTHER TRADE AND TRADE-RELATED MEASURES ............................................. 99

ANNEX 4 MEASURES AFFECTING TRADE IN SERVICES ................................................. 106

- 2 -

KEY FINDINGS

This Report covers new trade and trade-related measures implemented by G20 economies between 16 October 2017 and 15 May 2018. It reveals a number of important trends in global trade policy-making. While G20 economies continue to implement trade-facilitating measures, the more worrying trend during this period is the increase in trade-restrictive measures which has come at a time of increasing trade tensions and associated rhetoric.

This should be of real concern to the international community.

G20 economies applied 39 new trade-restrictive measures during the review period, including tariff increases, stricter customs procedures, imposition of taxes and export duties. This equates to an average of almost six restrictive measures per month, which is significantly higher than the three measures recorded during the previous review period.

G20 economies also implemented 47 measures aimed at facilitating trade during the review

period, including eliminated or reduced tariffs, simplified import and export customs procedures and reduction of import taxes. At almost seven trade-facilitating measures per

month, this is marginally higher than the six measures recorded in the previous period. The estimated trade coverage of import-facilitating measures (US$82.7 billion) is higher

than that of import-restrictive measures (US$74.1 billion) during the review period, but is approximately half the trade coverage reported for these measures during the same period in 2016-17. Moreover, the trade coverage of import-restrictive measures is more than one-and-a-half times larger than that during the same period in 2016-17.

On trade remedy measures, the review period saw a slight increase in initiations of investigations by G20 economies and a significant increase of terminations, compared to the

previous period. Initiations of trade remedy investigations represent almost half (49%) of all trade measures recorded during the review period. The trade coverage of trade remedy initiations recorded in this Report is estimated at US$52.3 billion and is significantly higher than in the two previous G20 Reports. The trade coverage of trade remedy terminations recorded in the review period is estimated at US$6.2 billion.

At a juncture where the global economy is finally beginning to generate sustained economic

momentum following the global financial crisis, the uncertainty created by a proliferation of trade restrictive actions could place economic recovery in jeopardy. The multilateral trading system was built to resolve such problems and it has the tools to do so again. However, further escalation could carry potentially large risks for the system itself. Its resilience and functionality in the face of these challenges will depend on each and every one of its Members. The G20 economies must use all means at their disposal to de-escalate the

situation and promote further trade recovery.

- 3 -

G20 Trade-restrictive measures

(average per month)

Note: Values are rounded. Changes to averages of previous years reflect continuing fine-tuning and updates of the TMDB.

Source: WTO Secretariat.

G20 Trade-facilitating measures

(average per month)

Note: Values are rounded. Changes to averages of previous years reflect continuing fine-tuning and updates of the TMDB.


7 7

6

8

5 5

3

6

0

5

10

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 mid-May17 to

mid-Oct17

mid-Oct17 to

mid-May18

Chart 3.1

Trade-restrictive measures (average per month)

WTO Secretariat.Source:

8

6

7 7

6

7

6

7

0

5

10

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 mid-May17 to

mid-Oct17

mid-Oct17 to

mid-May18

Chart 3.3

Trade-facilitating measures (average per month)


- 4 -

G20 Trade remedy initiations and terminations


G20 measures, mid-October 2017 to mid-May 2018 (by number)


17

23

22

18

22

21

19

22

13 13

14

13

12

9

6

11

-

5

10

15

20

25

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 mid-May17

mid-Oct17

mid-Oct17

mid-May18

G20 Trade remedy intitiations and terminations

Initiations avg per month Terminations avg per month

155 77 47 39

Trade remedy initiations Trade remedy terminations

Measures facilitating trade Trade-restrictive measures

318

Chart 1.[w]

G20 measures, mid-October 2017 to mid-May 2018

- 5 -

Trade coverage of G20 measures, mid-October 2017 to mid-May 2018 (US$ billion)


Box 1 About the WTO Monitoring Report on G20 Trade Measures

The Trade Monitoring Report is first and foremost a transparency exercise. It is intended to be purely factual and has no legal effect on the rights and obligations of WTO Members. It is without prejudice to Members' negotiating positions and has no legal implication with respect to the conformity of any measure noted in the report with any WTO Agreement or any provision thereof. The Report aims to shed light on the latest trends in the implementation of a broad range of policy measures that facilitate as well as restrict the flow of trade, and to provide an update on the state of global trade. The Report neither seeks to pronounce itself on whether a trade measure is protectionist, nor does it question the right of Members to take certain trade measures. The Reports continue to evolve in terms of the coverage and analysis of trade-related issues, and seek to take into account discussions among G20 economies. Regarding trade remedy actions, it has been highlighted in discussions among G20 economies, as well as more broadly in the WTO, that several of these measures are taken to address what is perceived by some as a market distortion resulting from trade practices of entities in another trading partner. The WTO Antidumping and Subsidies Agreements permit WTO Members to impose antidumping (AD) or countervailing (CVD) duties to

offset what is perceived to be injurious dumping or subsidization of products exported from one Member to another. The Reports are not in a position to establish if, where or when such perceived distortive practices have taken place. The Reports have never categorized the use of trade remedies as protectionist, WTO-inconsistent or criticized governments for utilizing them. The main objective of monitoring these measures is to provide added transparency and to identify emerging trends in the application of trade policy measures. With respect to sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) and technical barriers to trade (TBT) issues covered in the Reports, it is important to emphasize that they are neither classified nor counted as trade-restrictive or trade-facilitating, and the increasing trend with respect to the number of notifications of such measures is carefully linked to the transparency provisions of the Agreements only. The Reports have consistently underlined the basic premise that an increased number of SPS and TBT notifications do not automatically imply greater use of protectionist or unnecessarily trade-restrictive measures, but rather enhanced transparency regarding these measures. Finally, the Reports clearly emphasize that the SPS and TBT Agreements specifically allow Members to take measures in the pursuit of a number of legitimate policy objectives. The WTO Secretariat strives to ensure that the Trade Monitoring Reports are factual and objective. Since 2009, the Reports have aimed to provide a nuanced perspective on developments in the area of international trade. For example, the Reports have consistently emphasized that, although the number of specific and often long-term restrictive trade measures remains a source of serious concern, other key factors may influence trade developments. Discussions among G20 economies have also drawn attention to this point and to the fact that, with respect to both, vigilance is required.


52 6 83 74

Trade remedy initiations Trade remedy terminations

Measures facilitating trade Trade-restrictive measures

US$215

Chart 1.[w]

Trade coverage of G20 measures, mid-October 2017 to mid-May 2018

- 6 -

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This is the nineteenth WTO Monitoring Report on G20 trade measures.1 It covers new trade and trade-related measures implemented by G20 economies between 16 October 2017 and 15 May 2018.2 These Reports have been prepared in response to the request by G20 Leaders to the WTO, together with the OECD and UNCTAD, to monitor and report trade and investment measures implemented by G20 economies. The previous Report was issued on 9 November 2017.

World trade grew in 2017 at the fastest pace since the financial crisis, in both value and volume terms. The volume of world merchandise trade recorded growth of 4.7% last year, up from 1.8% in 2016. Trade growth was faster in the second half of 2017 than in the first. The dollar value of merchandise exports was up 11% to US$17.7 trillion in 2017 while commercial services exports grew by 7% to US$5.3 trillion. The pace of world GDP growth also picked up to 3% in 2017 from 2.3% in 2016. Stronger than expected trade and output growth in 2017 was largely due to cyclical

factors, including increased investment spending, which has a high import content. Trade growth is expected to remain strong in 2018 and 2019 but continued expansion depends on governments pursuing appropriate monetary, fiscal and especially trade policies.

Recently, some forward-looking trade-related indicators have turned down. This is at a juncture where the global economy is finally beginning to generate sustained economic momentum following the global financial crisis, and where any uncertainty created by a proliferation of

trade-restrictive actions, including some recent trade actions not captured in this Report, could place economic recovery in jeopardy. The multilateral trading system was built to resolve such problems and it has the tools to do so again. However, further escalation could carry potentially large risks for the system itself. Its resilience and functionality in the face of these challenges will depend on each and every one of its Members. The G20 economies must use all means at their disposal to de-escalate the situation and promote further trade recovery.

More specifically this Report shows that G20 economies applied 39 new trade-restrictive measures during the review period (mid-October 2017 to mid-May 2018), including tariff increases, stricter customs procedures, imposition of taxes and export duties. This equates to an average of almost six restrictive measures per month, which is significantly higher than the three measures recorded during the previous review period.

G20 economies also implemented 47 measures aimed at facilitating trade during the review period, including eliminated or reduced tariffs, simplified import and export customs procedures and reduction of import taxes. At almost seven trade-facilitating measures per month, this is slightly higher than the six measures recorded in the previous period. The estimated trade coverage of import-facilitating measures (US$82.7 billion) is higher than that of import-restrictive measures (US$74.1 billion). However, the estimated trade coverage of import-facilitating measures is only around half of the trade coverage reported for these measures during the same

period in 2016-17 (US$162.6 billion), while that of import-restrictive measures is more than one-and-a-half times larger than the trade coverage reported for these measures during the same period in 2016-17 (US$47 billion). Initiations of trade remedy investigations in the review period represented about half (49%) of trade measures recorded. Initiations of anti-dumping (AD) investigations accounted for almost 80% of all trade remedy initiations. G20 economies initiated on average 22 trade remedy

investigations and terminated 11 trade remedy actions per month during the review period. After a decline in initiations and terminations of trade remedy actions in G20 economies in 2017, the review period recorded an average of trade remedy initiations slightly above the 2012-17 trend

and an average of terminations in line with the 2012-17 trend. The main sectors affected by trade remedy initiations during the review period were iron and steel, plastics and articles thereof, vehicles, parts and accessories thereof and products of iron and steel. The trade coverage of trade

remedy initiations recorded in this Report is estimated at US$52.3 billion and is significantly higher than the coverage estimated in the two previous G20 Reports (US$25.1 billion in the June 2017

1 The WTO trade monitoring reports have been prepared by the WTO Secretariat since 2009. G20

members are: Argentina; Australia; Brazil; Canada; China; European Union; France; Germany; India; Indonesia; Italy; Japan; Korea, Republic of; Mexico; the Russian Federation; Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of; South Africa; Turkey; the United Kingdom and the United States.

2 Unless otherwise indicated in the relevant Section.

- 7 -

Report and US$29.4 billion in the November 2017 Report), perhaps suggesting that these measures are gaining in importance when governments decide on which trade policy tools are effective in managing trade flows. The trade coverage of trade remedy terminations recorded in the review period is estimated at US$6.2 billion. A range of other subjects are also covered by this Report. In the context of the Sanitary and

Phytosanitary (SPS) Committee, G20 economies remained active in notifying their SPS measures, accounting for 67% of all regular notifications since 1995. The objective most frequently identified in the SPS measures notified by G20 economies during the review period was food safety, accounting for 70% of the notifications. More than two-thirds of specific trade concerns (STCs) raised in the SPS Committee during the review period addressed measures maintained by G20 economies. The top ten targets of concerns were G20 measures.

Similarly, G20 economies are the most frequent users of the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee's transparency mechanisms, submitting almost half of all new regular TBT notifications since 1995. Regulations maintained by G20 members represent around 80% of all measures discussed in the TBT Committee since 1995. During the review period, the main indicated

objective of regulations introduced by G20 economies were the protection of human health or safety followed by the protection of the environment. In both the SPS and TBT Committees, G20

economies have spent considerable time discussing STCs, suggesting that the SPS and TBT Committees are increasingly seen as fora in which trade concerns may be effectively resolved. During the review period, a greater number of other trade concerns such as quantitative restrictions, customs fees and safeguard measures were raised in the various WTO bodies compared to the previous period. Several trade concerns were also raised in more than one WTO body, seemingly confirming that these concerns involve increasingly complex and cross-cutting

issues. G20 members, like the broader WTO membership, appear to be soliciting multiple platforms within the WTO committee structure to address various aspects of such trade concerns. From a systemic point of view, this is significant because of the increased transparency which it brings and because it demonstrates that WTO committees provide constructive platforms for trading partners to engage on potential areas of trade friction.

In the area of agriculture, policies by G20 economies attracted the majority (61%) of questions raised under the review process of the Committee on Agriculture (AoA). These questions were mainly related to domestic support policies and subsidized exports. G20 economies have shown a

high level of compliance with their transparency obligations under the AoA submitting 89% of their expected notifications for the period 1995-2016. Work on the implementation of the WTO's Trade Facilitation Agreement continues to advance.

Many Members concluded their domestic ratification processes, raising the total number of acceptances to about 83% of the entire WTO membership, including all G20 economies. Several new measures affecting trade in services, some horizontal in nature and some affecting a variety of service sectors, were introduced by G20 economies during the review period. In line with the findings of previous Reports, the majority of the measures provided for additional liberalization or was aimed at strengthening or clarifying regulatory frameworks. However, several new policies

implemented during the review period appear to be trade-restrictive. The Report also draws attention to developments in the area of Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), including the strengthening relation between intellectual property (IP) and trade and the development and diversification of IP related national policies. G20 economies are at the forefront of this trend and several of them established their own national

strategies to streamline IP into the economy. Following MC11, work continued throughout the first half of 2018 to advance negotiations on fisheries subsidies, building on the decision taken by Members in Buenos Aires, as well as on a number of other issues. Groups of Members also continued to pursue their discussions on issues including electronic commerce, investment facilitation, micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs), and women's economic empowerment.

- 8 -

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1. This nineteenth WTO Monitoring Report reviews trade and trade-related measures implemented by G20 economies during the period 16 October 2017 to 15 May 2018.3 The G20 Trade Monitoring Reports have been prepared in response to the request by G20 Leaders to the WTO, together with the OECD and UNCTAD, to monitor and report on trade and investment measures implemented by G20 economies. The previous Trade Monitoring Report on G20

economies, which covered the period from 16 May to 15 October 2017, was issued on 9 November 2017.

1.2. This Report is issued under the sole responsibility of the Director-General of the WTO. It is a transparency exercise and intended to be purely factual. It has no legal effect on the rights and obligations of WTO Members. It is without prejudice to any negotiating positions of Members and has no legal implication with respect to the conformity of any measure noted in the Report with

any WTO Agreement or any provision thereof.

1.3. The Report seeks to shed light on the latest trends in the implementation of a broad range of

policy measures that facilitate as well as restrict the flow of trade. It provides an update on the main indicators of the world economy and on the state of global trade. It neither seeks to pronounce itself on whether a trade measure is protectionist, nor does it question the right of Members to take certain trade measures. The Reports have continued to evolve in terms of the coverage and analysis of trade-related issues, taking into account discussions among and input

from G20 economies.

1.4. Section 2 of the Report provides an overview of recent economic and trade developments in G20 economies. Section 3 presents an overview of selected trade and trade-related policy trends. Overviews of policy developments in trade in services and trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights are included in Sections 4 and 5, respectively.

1.5. The four annexes to this Report comprise new measures recorded for G20 economies during the review period. Measures implemented outside this period are not included in these annexes. As

a result of the limited and uneven information provided by G20 economies on their programmes of general economic support and subsidies, it has not been possible to establish a separate annex on such measures. A summary table, listing all trade measures recorded since the beginning of the

trade monitoring exercise in October 2008 with an indication of their status, as updated by G20 delegations, is made available separately, and can be downloaded from the WTO's website.4 This information is also publicly available through the Trade Monitoring Data Base (TMDB).5

1.6. Information on measures included in this Report has been collated from inputs submitted by G20 economies and from other official and public sources. Initial responses to the Director-General's request for information were received from all G20 delegations. These data, as well as information collected from other sources, were returned for verification. Where it has not been possible to confirm the information, this is noted in the Annexes.

1.7. The OECD has contributed three topical boxes to this Report. The first shows the effects of non-tariff measures on prices and volumes of trade. The second deals with agricultural transfers

and the third focuses on the increasingly tighter regulatory conditions on global services trade markets. The International Trade Centre (ITC) has provided a box on digital technologies as a tool for gender-inclusive trade. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has contributed a box on a multidimensional approach to trade policy indicators.

3 Unless otherwise indicated in the relevant Section. In addition to the trade policy measures

implemented during the period under review and captured by this Report, other measures which impact trade flows may have been taken by G20 economies.

4 https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tpr_e/trade_monitoring_e.htm 5 http://tmdb.wto.org/

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tpr_e/trade_monitoring_e.htm

http://tmdb.wto.org/

- 9 -

2 RECENT ECONOMIC AND TRADE DEVELOPMENTS

2.1 Overview

2.1. World trade growth accelerated in the second half of 2017 as economic activity picked up globally. Year-on-year growth in the seasonally-adjusted volume of world merchandise trade increased to 5.2% in the second half of the year, up from 4.2% in the first half as measured by the average of exports and imports. The faster pace of expansion in the second half brought trade

growth for the whole of 2017 to 4.7%, the strongest annual increase in merchandise trade since 2011.

2.2. Trade growth in 2017 was even stronger in value terms, as merchandise exports rose 10.6% to US$17.73 trillion and commercial services exports grew 7.4% to US$5.25 trillion. The faster rate of increase in merchandise trade compared to commercial services trade partly reflects higher primary commodity prices. Energy prices increased by nearly 24% in 2017 while prices of

non-energy commodities rose 5.5% according to World Bank statistics.

2.3. Trade growth in 2017 was significantly stronger than in 2016, when the volume of world merchandise trade recorded weak expansion of just 1.8%. Merchandise exports fell 3% in value terms in 2016 to US$15.54 trillion while the value of commercial services exports registered a modest increase of 0.7%, rising to US$4.89 trillion. The stronger-than-expected recovery of trade in 2017 is mainly attributable to cyclical factors, as estimates of gross domestic product (GDP) from forecasting agencies were revised steadily upwards over the course of the year. World real

GDP at market exchange rates recorded growth of 3% in 2017, up from 2.3% in 2016. Economic activity was in turn driven by stronger investment spending, particularly in the United States, and rising consumption, notably in Japan. Meanwhile, China and the European Union maintained a steadier pace of output growth, providing a solid base for global demand.

2.4. Asia made the biggest contribution of any region to world trade volume growth in 2017, accounting for 51% of the increase in merchandise exports and 60% of growth in merchandise imports. South and Central America and the Caribbean also made a positive contribution to global

import demand for the first time since 2013, reducing the region's drag on world trade. Overall, trade growth in 2017 was more regionally balanced than at any time since the onset of the financial crisis.

2.5. Merchandise exports of developed economies grew 3.5% in volume terms in 2017 after recording an increase of just 1.1% in 2016. Exports of developing and emerging economies also picked up last year, with growth accelerating to 5.7% from 2.3% in the previous year. Developed

economies recorded import volume growth of 3.1% in 2017, which was stronger than the 2% increase recorded for 2016. Imports of developing and emerging economies were up strongly in 2017, with growth rising to 7.2% from 1.9% in 2016.

2.6. World merchandise trade growth is expected to remain strong in 2018 and 2019. The economic outlook remains positive, but continued expansion depends on governments pursuing appropriate monetary, fiscal and especially trade policies. In its latest statistical press release of 12 April 2018, the WTO forecasted trade volume growth of 4.4% for 2018, roughly in line with the

4.7% increase recorded for 2017. In recognition of the high degree of economic and policy uncertainty at the moment, the forecast for the current year is placed within a range of from 3.1% to 5.5%. World merchandise trade growth is predicted to slow slightly to 4% in 2019, below the 4.8% average since 1990, but firmly above the post-crisis average of 3%.

2.7. In light of recent trade policy developments, risks to the forecast are tilted to the downside. Increased use, as well as increasing threats, of restrictive trade policy measures contribute to uncertainty and could produce cycles of retaliation that would weigh on global trade and output.

Other risks to the forecast include the anticipated tightening of monetary policy by central banks and heightened geopolitical tensions, which could potentially have important negative consequences for trade. On the other hand, there is some upside potential if structural reforms and expansionary fiscal policy cause economic growth and trade to accelerate in the short run.

2.8. There are signs that escalating trade tensions may already be affecting business confidence and investment decisions and this could compromise the current outlook. Recent trade-related

- 10 -

economic indicators are mixed. These indicators are summarized in the WTO World Trade Outlook Indicator, which dipped to 101.8 in May from 102.3 in February (see Box 2.1 below). This suggests continued solid trade growth in Q2 but at a slower pace than in Q1.

2.2 Economic Developments

2.9. Historically, world merchandise trade volumes have grown about 1.5 times faster than world real GDP at market exchange rates since 1950. The ratio of trade growth to GDP growth, referred

to as the "elasticity of trade with respect to income", was greater than 2.0 in the 1990s, but fell back to around 1.0 in the years following the global financial crisis (2011-16). This measure of elasticity finally fell to 0.8 in 2016 before rebounding to 1.5 in 2017, close to the historical average. Stronger trade growth relative to GDP growth is expected to continue at least into 2018, barring any significant economic shock.

2.10. Global economic growth strengthened in the second half of 2017, but available data for the

first quarter of 2018 suggest that economic activity has eased. In the United States, GDP growth picked up from an annualized rate of 3.1% in Q2 to 3.2% in Q3, before moderating to 2.9% in Q4.

Although output growth slowed to 2.3% in the first quarter of 2018, it remained well above the 1.2% rate recorded for the first quarter of 2017. Investment made the largest contribution to U.S. output growth in Q1 of 2018, followed by consumption. Unemployment continued to fall in the first quarter, dropping to 3.9% in April from 4.1% in March, raising the probability of faster monetary policy tightening by the Federal Reserve.

2.11. Economic activity also slowed in the European Union (EU) in the first quarter of 2018, as growth fell to 1.6% from a sustained rate of around 2.7% throughout 2017 (all rates annualized). Growth in the narrower euro area was nearly identical to the wider EU, 1.6% in Q1 and 2.8% on average in 2017. Meanwhile, growth continued to slow in the United Kingdom, as output grew at an annualized rate of just 0.4% in Q1, down from 1.6% in Q4 of 2017 and 1.9% in Q3. EU-wide unemployment continued to trend gradually downward, dropping to 7.1% in March from an average rate of 7.6% in 2017. Unemployment rates differ widely across EU countries, with a low

rate of 3.4% prevailing in Germany and a higher rate of 8.8% in France.

2.12. Japan's rate of GDP growth slowed from an annualized rate of 2% in Q3 of 2017 to 0.6% in Q4 and further to -0.6% in the first quarter of 2018. The decline in Q1 was driven by a dip in

investment, including inventory investment, while consumption, government spending and external balances each contributed very little to growth. Japan's unemployment rate remained steady at 2.5% in March, which is lower than the 2.8% average rate for 2017.

2.13. GDP growth in China remains strong, but has moderated since the first half of 2017. China's economy expanded at an annualized rate of around 7.5% in Q3 of 2017, 6.5% in Q4, and roughly 6% in the first quarter of 2018. No harmonized unemployment rate is available for China, but the country's economic rebalancing away from manufacturing and toward services continues.

2.14. Economic growth in South and Central America has been mixed recently. Brazil's rate of GDP growth slowed to 0.2% annualized in the first quarter of 2018 from 1% in Q4 of 2017. Meanwhile, growth in Argentina accelerated to 3.9% in Q4 from 3.1% in Q3. Rising commodity

prices should boost export revenues and support stronger regional growth going forward.

2.15. Fluctuations in prices and exchange rates can strongly influence nominal trade statistics, which are usually expressed in current U.S. dollar terms. Recent developments are illustrated by Chart 2.1, which shows nominal effective exchange rate indices for selected economies through

March 2018. Currencies, including the dollar, have been relatively stable during the review period, with the dollar rising 0.9% on average against currencies of trading partners since last October. The dollar is down nearly 6% in nominal effective terms since January 2017, but currently trades

at roughly the same rate as in October 2015. China's currency appreciated by around 5% between October 2017 and March 2018 while the euro rose nearly 3% in nominal effective terms (i.e. on average against a broad basket of currencies) over the same period.

- 11 -

Chart 2.1 Nominal effective exchange rate indices for selected economies, January 2014 - March 2018a

(index, January 2014 = 100)

a Nominal effective exchange rate indices against a broad basket of currencies.

Source: Bank for International Settlements.

Chart 2.2 Prices of primary commodities, January 2014 – April 2018

(index, January 2014 = 100)

Source: World Bank Commodity Prices.

2.16. Chart 2.2 shows the latest developments in primary commodity prices, which have increased strongly in recent months. Since October 2017, prices for food, fuels and metals have

climbed 9.5%, 35% and 6%, respectively. Considering the relative stability of the dollar during this period, these increases represent a real strengthening of commodity prices compared to other goods rather than a change in the value of the denomination currency.

2.17. Robust U.S. crude oil production has kept oil prices from returning to the elevated levels that prevailed until the middle of 2014, but the recent upward trend is stronger than most forecasts from last year. Higher oil prices will squeeze household budgets in importing countries

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

United States China Japan Euro area Brazil United Kingdom

Chart Coleman.1

Exchange rate indices for selected economies, January 2014 - March 2018a

Index, January 2014=100

Source: Bank for International Settlements (BIS).

a Nominal effective exchange rate indices against a broad basket of currencies.

20

40

60

80

100

120

Food Agricultural raw materials Metals Fuel

Chart Coleman.2

Prices of primary commodities, January 2015 - April 2018

Indices, January 2014=100

Source: World Bank Commodity Price Data.

- 12 -

but could stimulate investment in the energy sector, making their overall economic impact ambiguous.

2.3 Merchandise Trade

2.18. Chart 2.3 shows year-on-year growth in the dollar value of world merchandise trade (red line), as well as contributions to nominal trade growth from developed and developing economies (stacked bars). World exports were up 11.4% in the fourth quarter of 2017. Developing economies

contributed slightly less than half of that growth (5.3 percentage points, or 46%), while developed economies were responsible for the rest (6.1 percentage points, or 54%). Developments on the import side were similar, with developed economies contributing more to the total increase (7.1 percentage points, or 59%) and developing economies accounting for the remainder (5 percentage points, or 41%).

2.19. Merchandise trade volume growth trended gradually upwards in most major economies in

the second half of 2017 (Chart 2.4). One notable exception was Brazil, where export and import volumes recorded larger percentage increases from a lower base recorded in the second half of

2016. Seasonally-adjusted exports and imports were up 3.7% and 4.3%, respectively, in the United States in the second half of 2017 compared to the same period in 2016. Extra-EU exports were up 5.4% year-on-year in the second half, up from 4% in the first half. Meanwhile, extra-EU imports were up 2.8% in the second half after registering a slight decline in the first half (-0.3%). Intra-EU trade growth also picked up in the second half of 2017, as shipments between EU

countries rose 4.4% year-on-year, compared to 2.2% in the first half.

2.20. Japan's exports and imports were up 6.8% and 3.8% year-on-year, respectively, in the second half of 2017, with little change compared to the first half of the year. Developing Asia (including China) recorded a 7.1% year-on-year increase in the volume of its exports in the second half of 2017, compared to 7.4% in the first half. Meanwhile, the region's imports were up by 7.5%, down from 10.4% in the first half. Brazil's exports jumped 13.4% in the second half of 2017 while imports rose by 9.6%.

2.21. Monthly merchandise trade statistics in nominal terms are more timely than quarterly statistics in volume terms. These are shown in Chart 2.5 through March 2018. Dollar values of exports and imports continue to rise in most countries, reflecting increases in both price and

volume. Trade statistics in current U.S. dollar terms should be interpreted with caution since they are strongly affected by fluctuations in prices and exchange rates.

2.4 Trade in Commercial Services

2.22. Year-on-year growth of commercial services exports in dollar value picked up in most major economies in the fourth quarter of 2017, except for India where export growth merely moderated. These developments are illustrated in Chart 2.6, which shows growth in quarterly services trade for selected G20 economies. Exports were up 6% year-on-year for the United States, 14.8% for the European Union, 9.1% for Japan, 11.9% for China, 8.1% for India and 2.6% for Brazil.1

2.23. On the import side, a sharp increase in the European Union was balanced by a slowdown in China in the fourth quarter. Imports rose 8.2% in the United States, 9.2% in the European Union,

1.3% in Japan, 9.9% in India and 8.3% in Brazil in Q4. However, commercial services imports of China fell 7.2% year-on-year in the latest period.

2.24. According to preliminary Secretariat estimates, global exports of commercial services were

up 7.4% in 2017 to US$5.25 trillion. The fastest growing services sector in 2017 was transport, which recorded year-on-year growth in U.S. dollar value of 8.3%, followed by other commercial services (7.4%, including financial services), travel (7.2%) and goods-related services (5.2%).

1 No comparable figures were available for the Russian Federation in 2017 Q4.

- 13 -

Chart 2.3 Contributions to year-on-year growth in world merchandise exports and imports, 2014Q1 - 2017Q4

(% change in US$ values)

a Includes significant re-exports. Also includes the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).

Note: Due to scarce data availability, Africa and Middle East are under-represented in world totals.

Source: WTO Secretariat estimates, based on data compiled from IMF International Financial Statistics; Eurostat Comext Database; Global Trade Atlas; and national statistics.

1.80.8 0.6

-2.2

-6.8 -6.6 -6.3 -5.5

-2.2-0.1 -0.1

1.1

3.72.3

4.66.1

-0.4

1.2 1.7

-2.2

-5.9-7.2

-9.0

-7.0

-5.5

-3.2-1.5

1.1

5.5

4.2

4.9

5.3

1.42.1 2.3

-4.4

-12.6

-13.9

-15.3

-12.5

-7.7

-3.3

-1.7

2.2

9.1

6.5

9.5

11.4

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

2014Q1 2014Q2 2014Q3 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016Q4 2017Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017Q4

Chart Coleman.3

Contributions to year-on-year growth in world merchandise exports and imports, 2014Q1 - 2017Q4

Source:

(Percentage change in US$ values)

Note

a Includes significant re-exports. Also includes the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).

Due to scarce data availability, Africa and Middle East are under-represented in world totals.

WTO Secretariat estimates, based on data compiled from IMF International Financial Statistics; Eurostat Comext Database; Global Trade Atlas; and national statistics.

Developed economies Developing economiesa

World, year-on-year percentage change

2.22.3

1.2

-2.4

-6.8-7.1

-7.0-5.2

-2.3-0.3 -0.1 0.5

3.5 2.74.8

7.1

-0.1 -0.3

0.5

-0.9

-5.5-5.9

-7.0

-6.6

-5.0

-2.7-1.8

1.0

5.6

4.3

4.8

5.0

2.0 2.0 1.7

-3.3

-12.4-13.0

-13.9

-11.8

-7.3

-3.1

-1.9

1.5

9.0

7.0

9.6

12.1

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

2014Q1 2014Q2 2014Q3 2014Q4 2015Q1 2015Q2 2015Q3 2015Q4 2016Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016Q4 2017Q1 2017Q2 2017Q3 2017Q4

Exports

Imports

- 14 -

Chart 2.4 Volume of exports and imports of selected economies, 2012Q1 - 2017Q4

(seasonally-adjusted volume indices, 2012Q1 = 100)

Note: Data for the United States, Japan and the European Union were obtained from national statistical sources while figures for Brazil and Developing Asia are seasonally-adjusted Secretariat estimates.

Source: WTO Secretariat and UNCTAD.

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

2012Q

1

Q2

Q3

Q4

2013Q

1

Q2

Q3

Q4

2014Q

1

Q2

Q3

Q4

2015Q

1

Q2

Q3

Q4

2016Q

1

Q2

Q3

Q4

2017Q

1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Chart Coleman.4

Volume of exports and imports of selected economies, 2012Q1 - 2017Q4

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

2012Q

1

Q2

Q3

Q4

2013Q

1

Q2

Q3

Q4

2014Q

1

Q2

Q3

Q4

2015Q

1

Q2

Q3

Q4

2016Q

1

Q2

Q3

Q4

2017Q

1

Q2

Q3

Q4

(Seasonally adjusted volume indices, 2012Q1 = 100)

Exports

Imports

Source: WTO Secretariat / UNCTAD.

Japan

EU-extra trade EU-intra tradeUnited States

Developing Asia

Note: Data for the United States, Japan and the EU were obtained from national statistical sources while figures for Brazil and Developing Asia are seasonally adjusted Secretariat estimates.

Brazil

- 15 -

2.5 Trade Forecast and Economic Outlook

2.25. Some leading and coincident indicators of merchandise trade have continued to point in a generally positive direction in the first quarter of 2018 while others have taken a more negative turn. An index of container port throughput from the Institute of Shipping Economics and Logistics (ISL) was up 4.2% year-on-year in March but has turned down recently, dropping 2.3% since January. Similarly, a measure of global export orders derived from HIS-Markit's global purchasing

managers' index fell to 50.9 in April from 54.1 in January. A value above 50 still indicates expansion, but the recent weakening may be attributed to the uncertainty characterizing the international trading environment at this point.

2.26. An index based on the frequency of phrases in press accounts of economic policy uncertainty jumped to 154.9 in April from 110.2, compared to a baseline of 100 equal to the average value of the index for the period 1997-2015 (www.PolicyUncertainty.com). This index

encompasses all types of policy uncertainty, including monetary, fiscal and trade policy. For example, planned investments could be postponed or curtailed due to rising economic uncertainty. This is important because investment is strongly correlated with world trade due to its high import

content.

2.27. Table 2.1 summarizes the WTO's latest trade forecast of 12 April 2018. If current forecasts for GDP growth are realized, the WTO anticipates world merchandise trade volume growth of 4.4% in 2018, with stronger growth in developing economies on both the export side (5.4%) and the

import side (4.8%). Developed countries should also experience reasonably strong growth in both exports (3.8%) and imports (4.1%). In recognition of the high level of economic and policy uncertainty, the WTO's trade forecast for 2018 has been placed within a range of from 3.1% to 5.5%.

2.28. In 2019, global trade growth is expected to moderate to 4%, with developing economies still outpacing developed countries in both exports (5.1% compared to 3.1%) and imports (4.4% compared to 3.3%). However, economic activity and trade could be hit by escalating trade

restrictions, which might result in more negative scenarios playing out. Other risks to the forecast include rising inflation, which could cause premature monetary policy tightening in developed countries, and geopolitical tensions, which could potentially have important negative consequences for trade. Economic forecasters generally expect monetary authorities to manage monetary policy

challenges successfully, but low unemployment and shrinking output gaps leave policymakers less room for manoeuvre. As a result, financial volatility could come to the fore if economic conditions

change.

- 16 -

Chart 2.5 Merchandise exports and imports of selected G20 economies, January 2012 – March 2018

(US$ billion)

Chart Coleman.5

Merchandise exports and imports of G20 economies, January 2012 - March 2018

United States Japan

(US$ billion)

European Union (extra-trade) China

Canada Turkey

0

50

100

150

200

250

Jan-12 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-180

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90


0

50

100

150

200

250


0

50

100

150

200

250


0

10

20

30

40

50

60


0

5

10

15

20


AustraliaRepublic of Korea

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45


0

5

10

15

20

25


0

5

10

15

20


Indonesia

0

5

10

15

20

25

30


Brazil

- 17 -

Source: IMF International Financial Statistics, Global Trade Information Services, Global Trade Atlas database and national statistics.

Russian Federation India

GermanyItaly

United Kingdom Argentina

Imports Exports

Chart Coleman.5 (continued)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50


0

2

4

6

8

10

12


South Africa

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


France

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160


0

10

20

30

40

50

60


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9


Mexico

0

10

20

30

40

50


- 18 -

Chart 2.6 Commercial services exports and imports of selected G20 economies, 2016Q4 - 2017Q4

(year-on-year percentage change in current US$ values)

Source: WTO and UNCTAD Secretariats.

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

United States European Union

(extra)

Japan China India Brazil Russian

Federation

Chart Coleman.6

Commercial services exports and imports of selected G-20 economies, 2016Q4 - 2017Q4

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

United States European Union

(extra)

Japan China India Brazil Russian

Federation

(Year-on-year % change in current US$ values)

Exports

Imports

Source: WTO and UNCTAD Secretariats.

2017Q32016Q4 2017Q1 2017Q2 2017Q4

- 19 -

Table 2.1 Merchandise trade volume and real GDP growth, 2014-19

(annual % change)

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018a 2019a

Volume of world merchandise tradeb 2.7 2.5 1.8 4.7 4.4 4.0

Exports

Developed economies 2.1 2.3 1.1 3.5 3.8 3.1 Developing economiesc 2.7 2.4 2.3 5.7 5.4 5.1 North America 4.6 0.8 0.6 4.2 4.5 4.5 South and Central America and the

Caribbean -2.1 1.8 1.9 2.9 2.8 2.6

Europe 1.6 2.9 1.1 3.5 3.6 2.9 Asia 4.5 1.5 2.3 6.7 5.7 5.0

Other regionsd -1.0 5.5 2.6 2.3 4.7 4.4

Imports

Developed economies 3.4 4.3 2.0 3.1 4.1 3.3

Developing economiesc 2.4 0.6 1.9 7.2 4.8 4.4 North America 4.3 5.4 0.1 4.0 5.7 5.0 South and Central America and the

Caribbean -2.7 -6.4 -6.8 4.0 3.9 5.7

Europe 3.0 3.7 3.1 2.5 3.5 2.8

Asia 3.7 4.0 3.5 9.6 5.9 4.7 Other regionsd 0.5 -5.6 0.2 0.9 0.4 1.8

Real GDP at market exchange rates 2.7 2.7 2.3 3.0 3.2 3.1 Developed economies 2.0 2.3 1.6 2.3 2.4 2.2

Developing economiesc 4.3 3.7 3.6 4.3 4.6 4.6

North America 2.6 2.7 1.5 2.4 2.8 2.7 South and Central America and the

Caribbean 0.9 -0.9 -2.1 1.0 2.3 2.8

Europe 2.0 2.3 1.9 2.6 2.4 2.1

Asia 4.1 4.2 4.1 4.5 4.5 4.4

Other regionsd 2.5 1.1 2.2 2.0 2.8 2.9

a Figures for 2018 and 2019 are projections. b Average of exports and imports. c Includes the CIS, including associate and former member States. d Other regions comprise Africa, Middle East and the CIS.

Source: WTO Secretariat for trade, consensus estimates for GDP.

- 20 -

Box 2.1 The WTO World Trade Outlook Indicator

The World Trade Outlook Indicator (WTOI) is a composite leading indicator for world trade launched by the WTO in 2016. Designed to provide "real time" information on the trajectory of world trade relative to recent trends, the WTOI is not intended as a short-term forecast, although it does provide an indication of trade growth in the near future. Its main contribution is to identify turning points and gauge momentum in global trade growth. As such, it complements trade statistics and forecasts from the WTO and other organizations. The WTOI combines six component indices of trade-related data into an overall index that signals trade conditions 3-4 months ahead of quarterly trade volume data. Readings of 100 indicate growth in line with medium-term trends; readings greater than 100 suggest above-trend growth, while those below 100 indicate the reverse. The direction of change reflects momentum compared with the previous month. The WTOI's component indices include the following: - global export orders reported by manufacturers in national purchasing managers indices; - international air freight in freight tonne kilometres (FTKs) from the International Air Transport Association (IATA); - container throughput of major ports, in twenty-foot equivalent units (TEU); - automobile sales and/or production in selected economies; - customs data on electronic components trade in physical units; and - customs data on agricultural raw materials trade in physical units. The latest WTOI of 17 May 2018 remained above trend with a value of 101.8, but displayed a loss of momentum compared to the previous release of 12 February, which came in at 102.3. These values suggest continued solid trade growth in the second quarter of 2018 but probably at a somewhat slower pace than in the first quarter. The recent dip in the WTOI reflects declines in export orders in particular but also for air freight, which may be linked to rising economic uncertainty due to increased trade tensions. The forward-looking export orders index dropped sharply, falling below-trend to 98.1 in the latest month. Although the air freight index remains above

trend at 102.5, it has declined in recent months. While container throughput remains above trend (105.8), automobile sales (97.9) and agricultural raw materials (95.9) are currently weighing down the overall index. In contrast to the other indices, the electronic components index (104.2) has turned up, rising above trend.

The latest results are broadly in line with the WTO's most recent trade forecast issued on 12 April 2018, which predicted a moderation of merchandise trade volume growth from 4.7% in 2017 to 4.4% in 2018. The WTOI should be monitored closely going forward as it would likely provide an early signal of real impacts from rising protectionist rhetoric.


- 21 -

3 TRADE AND TRADE-RELATED POLICY DEVELOPMENTS

3.1 Overview of Trends Identified During the Period under Review

3.1. The following provides analysis of a number of selected trade and trade-related policy developments during the period from mid-October 2017 to mid-May 2018.

3.2. The WTO trade monitoring exercise is, above all, about transparency. It is intended to be factual and without prejudice to the rights and obligations of WTO Members. It is not a legal

exercise. The regular Monitoring Reports seek to capture recent trends in the implementation of trade measures and contextualize them with the global economic environment and other developments in the international trading system. The contribution of G20 economies in the trade monitoring effort and in establishing a platform for a regular and collective peer review of trade policies is fundamental for the substantive debate on the importance of transparency and predictability in trade policy-making (Box 1).

3.3. This is the third WTO Monitoring Report on G20 trade measures since a methodology change

which introduced a separate annex for trade remedy measures.1 Nevertheless, the Report continues to cover and crystalize the same factual information and the same types of measures as previously.

3.4. A total of 318 trade measures were recorded for the G20 economies by this Report for the review period.2 This overall figure includes measures facilitating trade, trade remedy measures and other trade and trade-related measures (restrictive measures).

3.1.1 Measures facilitating trade

3.5. Annex 1 to this Report lists measures which are clearly trade-facilitating.

3.6. During the review period, 47 new measures aimed at facilitating trade were recorded for G20 economies (Table 3.1), some of a temporary nature (13). This represents 15% of the total number of measures recorded. The monthly average of 6.7 trade-facilitating measures recorded for the period is slightly higher than the average recorded for the previous period and broadly in line with the 2012-17 trend.

3.7. Table 3.1 shows that, among trade-facilitating measures, the reduction or elimination of import tariffs continues to make up the bulk, followed by simplified customs procedures for imports and various reductions of taxes. On the export side, the elimination and simplification of customs procedures, as well as the elimination of an export duty were recorded.

Table 3.1 Measures facilitating trade (Annex 1)

Type of measure 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Mid

-May 1

7

to

mid

-Oct

17

(5 m

onth

s)

Mid

-Oct

17

to

mid

-May 1

8

(7

mon

ths)

Import 83 62 72 68 62 62 23 40 - Tariff 72 50 59 56 53 50 20 30 - Customs procedures 8 11 9 8 7 10 2 6 - Tax 1 1 0 3 2 2 1 3

1 Previously, the Report included trade remedies in the analysis of trade-restrictive as well as trade

facilitating measures. The June 2017 Report provided some background as to why this approach had proved controversial with many G20 economies over the past few years. Above all, many have argued that trade remedy measures are taken to address market distortions resulting from trade practices in another trading partner. The WTO Anti-Dumping and Subsidies Agreements permit WTO Members to impose duties to offset what is perceived to be injurious dumping or subsidization of products exported from one Member to another. The Monitoring Reports are not in a position to establish if, where or when such perceived distortive practices have taken place.

2 See Annexes 1-3. These Annexes do not include SPS and TBT measures which are covered in Sections 3.3 and 3.4. Services measures are analysed in Section 4 and are listed in Annex 4.

- 22 -

Type of measure 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Mid

-May 1

7

to

mid

-Oct

17

(5 m

onth

s)

Mid

-Oct

17

to

mid

-May 1

8

(7

mon

ths)

- QRs 2 0 4 1 0 0 0 1 Export 7 4 5 19 12 18 5 7 - Duties 3 2 2 10 5 1 0 1 - QRs 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 0 - Other 1 0 2 7 6 16 4 6 Other 4 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 Total 94 67 78 89 76 80 28 47 Average per month 7.8 5.6 6.5 7.4 6.3 6.7 5.6 6.7

Note: Revisions of the data reflect changes undertaken in the TMDB to fine-tune and update the available information. Facilitating measures now mainly cover Annex 1 measures and those Annex 3 measures which have been reported as terminated by Members.


3.8. The trade coverage of the import-facilitating measures introduced during the review period was US$82.7 billion3, i.e. 0.68% of the value of G20 merchandise imports or 0.52% of the value of world merchandise imports.4 This is approximately half of the trade coverage reported for this type of measures during the same period in 2016-17. The HS Chapters within which the majority of trade-facilitating measures were taken include pharmaceutical products (HS30) 20.7%, machinery and mechanical appliances (HS84) 18.3%, electrical machinery and parts thereof (HS85) 13.3%,

and perfumery, cosmetics or toilet preparations (HS33) 6.2%.

3.1.2 Trade remedy actions

3.9. During the review period, 232 trade remedy actions were recorded for G20 economies (Table 3.2), i.e. 73% of all trade measures recorded in this Report.5 A comprehensive overview of these trade remedy measures can be found in Annex 2. As can be seen from Table 3.2 below, G20 economies continue to initiate a significantly higher number of new trade remedy investigations

compared to the number of trade remedy actions they terminate.6 Initiations of trade remedy

actions taken during the review period outpaced terminations by a ratio of two to one. Overall, initiations of trade remedy investigations alone represented almost half of the total trade measures recorded in this Report. The monthly average of initiations of trade remedy actions between mid-October 2017 and mid-May 2018 is slightly above the trend between 2012 and 2017.

3.10. Initiations of AD investigations continue to be the most frequent trade remedy action, accounting for around 80% of all initiations. This broadly corresponds to the share reported in

previous reports. The monthly average of initiations of CVD investigations reached its highest level since 2012.

3 Import-facilitating measures include one measure by China (reduction of interim tariffs) accounting for

35.7% of the total, and two measures by Brazil (temporary reduction of import tariffs on capital goods, informatics and telecom) accounting for 23.6% of the total.

4 The trade coverage of a measure is calculated to be the value of annual imports of the specific product concerned from countries affected by the measure as a share of either the value of annual merchandise imports of G20 economies or the value of total world merchandise imports. Highly-traded goods may significantly influence trade coverage estimates.

5 A single methodology for the counting of AD and CVD investigations is being applied across the Report, i.e. on the basis of the number of exporting countries or customs territories affected by an investigation or by a termination. Thus, one AD or CVD investigation involving imports from n countries/customs territories is counted as n investigations. Similarly, the termination of an AD or CVD action is counted as n terminations.

6 Termination means either the termination of the investigation (without imposition of a measure) or elimination of the imposed measure.

- 23 -

Table 3.2 Trade remedy actions (Annex 2)

Type of measure 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Mid

-May 1

7 t

o

mid

-Oct

17

(5 m

onth

s)

Mid

-Oct

17

to

mid

-May 1

8

(7

mon

ths)

Initiations 201 278 258 210 262 257 97 155 - AD 166 238 208 175 226 212 77 122 - CVD 22 33 37 31 30 39 16 27

- SG 13 7 13 4 6 6 4 6 Average per month 16.8 23.2 21.5 17.5 21.8 21.4 19.4 22.1 Terminations 161 153 171 151 143 112 32 77 - AD 130 135 144 122 121 91 28 62 - CVD 21 15 21 19 15 11 3 12 - SG 10 3 6 10 7 10 1 3 Average per month 13.4 12.8 14.3 12.6 11.9 9.3 6.4 11.0

Note: The information on trade remedy actions for 2012-2017 is based on the semi-annual notifications by G20 economies. For January 2018 to mid-May 2018, the information is based on the responses and the verification received directly from G20 economies during the preparations for the present Report. Anti-circumvention measures are not included in the above numbers.


3.11. The trade remedy actions taken during the review period covered a wide range of products. In the case of initiations of investigations, the main sectors (HS Chapters) were iron and steel (HS72) 40%, plastics and articles thereof (HS39) 11.3%, vehicles, parts and accessories thereof HS87) 10.3%, and products of iron and steel (HS73) 9%.

3.12. The trade coverage of all trade remedy investigations initiated during the review period was US$52.3 billion, i.e. 0.43% of the value of G20 merchandise imports, or 0.33% of the value of world merchandise imports (Table 3.3). This is double the trade coverage recorded for such

measures during the comparable period in 2016-17. For terminations, the trade coverage was valued at US$6.2 billion (0.05% of the value of G20 merchandise imports or 0.04% of world merchandise imports).

Table 3.3 Share of trade covered by trade remedy initiations

Mid

-Oct

14

to m

id-

May 1

5a

Mid

-May t

o

mid

-

Oct

15

b

Mid

-Oct

15 t

o

mid

-May 1

6b

Mid

-May t

o

mid

-Oct

16

c

Mid

-Oct

16

to

mid

-May 1

7 c

Mid

-May 1

7 t

o

mid

-Oct

17

d

Mid

-Oct

17

to

mid

-May 1

8d

Share in G20 imports

0.11% 0.10% 0.47% 0.11% 0.20% 0.24% 0.43%

Share in total world imports 0.08% 0.08% 0.36% 0.08% 0.15% 0.19% 0.33%

a Based on 2013 import data. b Based on 2014 import data. c Based on 2015 import data. d Based on 2016 import data.


3.1.3 Other trade and trade-related measures7

3.13. Annex 3 to this Report lists measures which may be considered to have a trade-restrictive effect.

7 Annex 3 does not include SPS, TBT and services measures, which are dealt with in Sections 3.3, 3.4,

and 4 and Annex 4.

- 24 -

3.14. A total of 39 new trade-restrictive measures were recorded for G20 economies. This equates to an average of 5.6 restrictive measures per month, which is slightly below the 2012-17 trend, but significantly higher than the average for the preceding period. Tariff increases account for more than three-quarters of all import restrictive measures recorded, followed by stricter customs procedures and imposition of new taxes. With respect to export and other measures, local content regulations, a quantitative restriction and two export duties were recorded. (Table 3.4).

Table 3.4 Other trade and trade-related measures (Annex 3)

Type of measure 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Mid

-May 1

7

to m

id-O

ct

17

(5 m

onth

s)

Mid

-Oct

17

to

mid

-May 1

8

(7

mon

ths)

Import 59 59 45 60 42 38 10 33 - Tariff 25 34 29 35 25 23 9 25 - Customs procedures 25 15 12 18 13 13 1 5 - Tax 3 3 2 4 2 0 0 2 - QRs 4 7 2 3 2 2 0 1 - Other 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Export 10 20 14 23 6 11 3 4 - Duties 1 1 4 5 1 3 1 2 - QRs 5 4 5 4 1 4 1 1 - Other 4 15 5 14 4 4 1 1 Other 9 4 9 9 10 11 3 2 - Othera 5 0 0 0 3 1 0 1 - Local content 4 4 9 9 7 10 3 1 Total 78 83 68 92 58 60 16 39 Average per month 6.5 6.9 5.7 7.7 4.8 5.0 3.2 5.6

a Other than local content measures.

Note: Revisions of the data reflect changes undertaken in the TMDB to fine-tune and update the available information.


3.15. The measures recorded in Annex 3 cover a range of products. The main sectors (HS Chapters) were: mineral and fuels (HS27) 30.2%, electrical machinery and parts thereof (HS85) 20.7%, iron and steel (HS72) 11.4% and aluminium and articles thereof (HS76) 10.2%. The trade coverage of the trade-restrictive measures affecting imports introduced during the review period was US$74.1 billion, i.e. 0.61% of the value of G20 merchandise imports or 0.47% of the value of world merchandise imports.8 This is more than one-and-a-half times larger than the trade coverage reported for these measures during the same period in 2016-17.

8 These figures include one measure by Mexico (petroleum and oil products subject to mandatory prior

import authorization) accounting for 30.2% of the total, and one measure by India (increase of import tariffs on several products) accounting for 16.4%.

- 25 -

Table 3.5 Share of trade covered by import-restrictive measures (Annex 3)

Mid

-

Oct

14

to

mid

-

May 1

5a

Mid

-May t

o

mid

-

Oct

15

cb

Mid

-Oct

15 t

o

mid

-

May 1

6c

Mid

-May t

o

mid

-Oct

16

c

Mid

-Oct

16 t

o

mid

-

May 1

7d

Mid

-May 1

7 t

o

mid

-Oct

17

d

Mid

-Oct

17

to

mid

-May 1

8d

Share in G20 imports

0.93% 0.27% 0.51% 0.11% 0.37% 0.26% 0.61%

Share in total world imports

0.72% 0.21% 0.40% 0.08% 0.29% 0.2% 0.47%

a Based on 2013 import data. b Based on 2014 import data. c Based on 2015 import data. d Based on 2016 import data.


Chart 3.1 G20 measures, mid-October 2017 to mid-May 2018

(by number)


Chart 3.2 Trade coverage of G20 measures, mid-October 2017 to mid-May 2018

(US$ billion)


3.16. The above Sections have provided detailed information on the latest trends among G20 economies in trade policy-making and has confirmed a number of findings of previous reports. For example, the numerical importance of trade remedy measures, AD measures in particular, in the

- 26 -

overall number of trade and trade-related measures is fully consistent with previous reports. At the same time, the trade coverage of all trade remedy investigations introduced during this review period (US$52.3 billion) was significantly higher than in the two previous G20 Reports9, perhaps suggesting that these measures are gaining in importance when governments decide on which trade policy tools are effective in managing trade flows.

3.17. This Report has recorded a small increase in the monthly average of import-facilitating

measures. Although this is an encouraging development for global trade at this point, a more notable and concerning trend is that the monthly average of trade-restrictive measures recorded has increased significantly compared to the previous report. While the estimated trade coverage for import-restrictive measures is slightly lower than that of import-facilitating measures, it should be noted that in the June 2017 G20 Report this relationship was three to one in favour of trade-liberalizing measures. It should also be recalled that the predominant trend since 2008 has

been for the trade coverage of trade facilitating measures to exceed that of trade restrictive measures. The fact that these figures were almost equal for the current review period is a source of considerable concern and an area where continued monitoring is required.

3.18. Two trade measures by the United States on steel and aluminium products, following an investigation under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, were implemented within the review period and received considerable attention. A number of measures were taken or announced in response to the above tariffs. The majority of these measures did not enter into

force before 15 May 2018 and as a result do not feature in the Annexes to this Report. The WTO Secretariat will continue to monitor this situation and seek further information on these measures.

3.19. On a more general note, although this Report has confirmed a number of important trends in global trade policy-making, including the fact that G20 economies continue to implement trade-facilitating measures, there are strong reasons for concern. At a juncture where the global economy is finally looking to generate sustained economic momentum the uncertainty created by the proliferation of trade actions, and the reaction to them, could place an economic recovery in

jeopardy. These developments will be closely monitored in the end-of-year G20 Report.

3.20. Box 3.1 on the effects of non-tariff measures on prices and volumes of trade has been contributed by the OECD.

9 30 June 2017 (US$25.1 billion) and 9 November 2017 (US$29.4 billion).

- 27 -

Box 3.1 Effects of non-tariff measures on prices and volumes of trade

The term "non-tariff measures" (NTMs) covers a diverse set of measures in terms of purpose, legal form and economic effect. This diversity makes their quantitative analysis difficult, and they have been the object of substantial academic and policy attention. NTMs comprise all policy measures other than tariffs and tariff-rate quotas that have a more or less direct incidence on international trade as they affect the price of traded products, the quantity traded, or both. Most importantly, domestic regulations may prescribe specific requirements for products to be sold on a given market. Generally, such measures aim to overcome or reduce the impacts of market imperfections, such as those related to negative externalities, risks for human, animal or plant health, or information asymmetries. However, they also tend to increase production and trade costs and may affect, positively or negatively, the development of new technologies or production methods. These costs tend to be particularly burdensome for SMEs.

New OECD estimates disentangle the distinct effects that NTMs can have on trade volumes versus prices. The econometric estimates distinguish five different types of NTMs, following the UNCTAD MAST classification: technical regulations in the areas of SPS, TBT and pre-shipment inspection as well as quantitative import restrictions such as quotas and non-automatic licensing. The price-based estimations yield a large set of ad-valorem tariff-equivalents (AVEs) that are specific for bilateral trade between more than 80 countries and roughly 5,000 products. The average AVEs across countries are found to range from 29% (processed food) to 6% (machinery and electrical equipment).

The volume-based estimates, also proxied by AVEs, yield information that show how the trade cost associated with NTMs typically reduces trade volumes, but not always. In a number of cases, in particular in the SPS area, trade is found to expand, even though trade costs rise. This trade enhancing effect can come from regulatory features that reduce information asymmetries and strengthen consumer confidence in imported products. A growing body of evidence suggests that reducing regulatory heterogeneity reduces trade costs. Indeed, the OECD study confirms the negative relationship between greater regulatory similarity (measured as the regulatory distance between pairs of countries' MAST classifications for particular product NTMs) and the size of the AVEs. Complying with regulations is hardly ever costless, but this finding re-iterates the fact that costs that stem solely from regulatory differences between countries add to costs and thus their reduction, through various regulatory co-operation mechanisms, could expand trade, particularly for SMEs.

Price effect versus regulatory distance with partners

_______________ Note: Regulatory similarity is measured by scoring the degree to which a country pair has the same measure on

a given HS6 product (index =1) or not (index = 0) and subsequently aggregating a normalizing to a number between zero and one.

Further reading:

OECD (2017), International Regulatory Co-operation and Trade: Understanding the Trade Costs of Regulatory

Divergence and the Remedies, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264275942-en.

OECD (2018), Combining price-based and quantity-based approaches, TAD/TC/WP (2017)12/FINAL Cadott, O., J. Gourdon, F. van Tongeren (2018), Estimating Ad Valorem Equivalents of Non-Tariff Measures: Combining price-based and quantity-based approaches, OECD Trade Policy papers, no 215, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/18166873.

Source: OECD.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264275942-en

http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/18166873

- 28 -

3.2 Trade Remedies10

3.21. This Section provides an assessment of trends in trade remedies during these periods: January – June 2016, July – December 2016, January – June 2017 and July – December 2017.11 It also includes an assessment of these periods on a six-month and 12-month basis so as to show trends over time.

Anti-Dumping Measures12

3.22. The most recent available data (July - December 2017) show a 28% decrease in the number of AD investigations initiated by G20 members compared to the previous six-month period (January – June 2017). Table 3.6 shows that G20 members initiated 89 AD investigations in the most recent period, compared with 123 during the previous six months.

3.23. In 2017, there were notable decreases in the number of investigations initiated by Argentina, Brazil, European Union, India, Indonesia and Turkey compared to 2016. In the same

period, a significant increase was seen in the number of investigations initiated by China (from 5

to 24) and the United States (from 37 to 54).

Table 3.6 Initiations of AD investigations

G20 Member Jan-June

2016 July-Dec

2016 Jan-June

2017 July-Dec

2017 2016 2017

Argentina 6 17 4 4 23 8 Australia 11 6 12 4 17 16

Brazil 4 7 5 2 11 7 Canada 3 11 8 6 14 14 China 2 3 9 15 5 24 European Union 5 9 3 6 14 9 India 48 21 34 15 69 49 Indonesia 0 7 0 1 7 1 Japan 0 1 2 0 1 2 Korea, Republic of 0 4 3 4 4 7

Mexico 1 5 1 7 6 8 Russian Federationa 0 1 1 0 1 1 Saudi Arabia, Kingdom ofb

0 0 1 3 0 4

Turkey 4 13 6 2 17 8 United States 24 13 34 20 37 54

Total 108 118 123 89 226 212

a Notified by the Russian Federation; investigations are initiated by the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) on behalf of all of its members collectively.

b Notified individually by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; investigations are initiated by the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) on behalf of all of its members collectively.


3.24. In terms of product breakdown, metal products accounted for the largest share of initiations over the entire reporting period, except for the period between January and June 2017. This sector accounted for 41 initiations in the first half of 2016 and increased significantly to 53 initiations in the second half. This number dropped back to 41 initiations in the first half of 2017 and decreased to 21 initiations in the second half. Steel products (goods classified under HS Chapters 72 and 73)

accounted for the vast majority of these investigations (138 out of 156) – 88%. In many instances, a single importing Member initiated investigations on the same steel product from a number of different sources simultaneously – ten steel products account for 83 of the investigations over these periods. China continues to be the most frequent target of investigations

10 This Section is without prejudice to the right of Members to take trade remedy actions under the

WTO. 11 These periods are selected because they coincide with the Member's semi-annual reporting periods. 12 Anti-dumping and countervailing investigations are counted on the basis of the number of exporting

countries or customs territories affected by an investigation. Thus, one anti-dumping or countervailing investigation involving imports from n countries/customs territories is counted as n investigations.

- 29 -

on metal products with 16 investigations in 2017, followed by the Republic of Korea and Viet Nam with five investigations each. The United States initiated 28 investigations in this sector in 2017, followed by Australia with 15 and the European Union with five.

3.25. Chemical products accounted for the second-largest share of AD investigations overall over the four reporting periods. The number of initiations concerning chemical products significantly increased from 42 in 2016 to 64 in 2017. India was the principal driver behind these initiations,

accounting for 47 of the 106 new investigations of products in this sector over the 24 months examined. The Republic of Korea was the most targeted Member by initiations in this sector in 2017 (6 out of 64), with the remainder targeting a wide range of exporting countries or customs territories.

3.26. Plastics and rubber ranked third over the reporting periods, accounting for 13% of all initiations during the first 12 month period and 12% in the second. Textiles, which accounted for

9% of all initiations during the entire reporting period, ranked fourth.

3.27. While AD investigations do not necessarily lead to the imposition of measures, a rise in their

number is an early indicator of a likely rise in the number of measures imposed. Over 2016 and 2017, a total of 294 AD measures were imposed by G20 members (as shown in Table 3.7). However, as it can take up to 18 months for an AD investigation to be concluded, these measures may not necessarily be the result of initiations in the same period.

Table 3.7 Number of AD measures imposed by G20 members

G20 Member Jan-June

2016 July-Dec

2016 Jan-June

2017 July-Dec

2017 2016 2017

Argentina 0 1 1 1 1 2 Australia 3 2 9 5 5 14 Brazil 5 8 6 4 13 10 Canada 1 2 10 0 3 10 China 3 8 2 3 11 5 European Union 1 4 7 4 5 11 India 27 10 31 16 37 47 Indonesia 0 0 2 1 0 3 Japan 0 2 0 1 2 1 Korea, Republic of 1 2 0 4 3 4 Mexico 7 5 2 0 12 2 Russian Federation 3 1 0 1 4 1 Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of

0 0 1 0 0 1

Turkey 4 5 2 8 9 10 United States 9 26 23 10 35 33 Total 64 76 96 58 140 154


- 30 -

Chart 3.3 AD duty initiations by product

Note: Values are rounded.


3.28. Since 2009, AD activities of G20 members initially declined through 2011 then rebounded, peaking in 2013, with 238 new investigations (Chart 3.4).13 Following a downward trend in 2014 and 2015, the number of initiations increased again in 2016 reaching 226. However, the number of investigations decreased slightly to 212 in 2017.

13 While 2013 shows an important increase in activity, the number of initiations is still significantly lower

than the peaks of activity seen in 1999-2002.

January - June 2016 July - December 2016

Plastics10%

Textiles11%

Chart TR.1

Anti-dumping initiations by product

Chemicals18%

Paper5%

Metals38%

Others19%

Machinery6%

Plastics15%

Metals45%

Others8%

Chemicals20%

Glass/Ceramics6%

July - December 2017January - June 2017

Chemicals38%

Metals33%

Plastics 4%

Others7%

Textiles14%

Glass / Ceramics

4%



Metals24%

Plastics 24%

Chemicals19%

Others13%

Paper 11%

Textiles9%

- 31 -

Chart 3.4 AD investigations by G20 members, 2009–17


Countervailing Measures

3.29. As shown in Table 3.8, the countervailing activities of G20 members decreased in the most recent period (July – December 2017) compared with the preceding six-month period. However,

over the two most recent 12-month periods, G20 countervailing activity has increased

significantly.

Table 3.8 Initiations of countervailing duty investigations

G20 member Jan-June

2016 July-Dec

2016 Jan-June

2017 July-Dec

2017 2016 2017

Australia 3 5 0 0 8 0

Brazil 0 1 0 1 1 1 Canada 1 1 5 6 2 11 China 1 0 1 0 1 1 European Union 1 0 0 2 1 2 India 1 0 0 0 1 0 United States 12 4 16 8 16 24 Total 19 11 22 17 30 39


3.30. Various sectors were affected by CVD investigations over the four periods, with metal products remaining the most targeted, accounting for 30 of the 69 initiations by G20 economies over the 24-month period examined. Twenty-four of these investigations involving the metal sector were in relation to steel products. Almost all of the investigations involving the metal sector were conducted concurrently with an AD investigation on the same product.

3.31. The chemical and plastics sectors accounted for the second- and third-largest number of

investigations with 14 and 11 initiations, respectively. The remaining investigations covered a range of goods including paper, wood products, textiles, foodstuffs and live animals.

161

137

127

166

238

208

175

226

212

0

50

100

150

200

250

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017


Chart TR.2

Anti-dumping investigations by G-20 members, 2009-2017

- 32 -

Chart 3.5 CVD duty initiations by product



3.32. Over the 24 months covered in this Section, a total of 40 CVD measures were imposed by G20 members (Table 3.9). However, as it can take up to 18 months for a CVD investigation to be concluded, these measures may not necessarily be the result of initiations in the same period.

Chart TR.3

Countervailing duty initiations by product

July - December 2016January - June 2016

Metals42%

Others16%

Chemicals10%

Plastics21%

Paper 11%

Metals73%

Wood products

18%

Others9%

January - June 2017 July - December 2017

Chemicals55%

Others18%


Plastics35%

Others19%


Metals28%

Metals47%

- 33 -

Table 3.9 Number of CVD measures imposed by G20 economies

G20 member Jan-June

2016 July-Dec

2016 Jan-June

2017 July-Dec

2017 2016 2017

Australia 0 1 2 1 1 3 Brazil 1 0 0 0 1 0 Canada 1 1 1 0 2 1 China 0 0 1 0 0 1

European Union 1 0 1 0 1 1 India 1 0 0 1 1 1 United States 4 12 9 2 16 11 Total 8 14 14 4 22 18


AD and CVD Measures by Trading Partner

3.33. Chart 3.6 shows the top six trading partners affected by trade remedy initiations (excluding safeguards) reported by each G20 member between 2008 and 2017. China remained, by far, the exporter most targeted by initiations reported during this period – accounting for one-third of these. The second most targeted exporter during this period – the Republic of Korea - accounted for 7% of total initiations. The share of G20 initiations involving products from other G20 members

accounted for approximately 71% of total initiations. In all reporting periods, initiations on products from other G20 members accounted for at least 50% of each individual G20 member's total initiations.

- 34 -

Chart 3.6 AD and CVD initiations, by trading partner, 2008-2017

(number of initiations)

Argentina Australia

Chart TR.4

Anti-dumping and countervailing initiations, by trading partner, 2008-2017(Number of initiations)

Brazil Canada

India Indonesia

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

G20

Indonesia

Korea, Rep. of

United States

India

Brazil

China

G20 as share of total: 79%

0 20 40 60 80 100

G20

Indonesia

Malaysia

Chinese Taipei

Thailand

Korea, Rep. of

China


0 50 100 150 200 250

G20

Germany

Chinese Taipei

United States

India

Korea, Rep. of

China


0 20 40 60 80 100

G20

Viet Nam

Thailand

Turkey

India

Korea, Rep. of

China


0 20 40 60 80 100 120

G20

India

Thailand

Korea, Rep. of

Japan

EU

United States


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

G20

Korea, Rep.of

Russian Fed

Turkey

United States

India

China


European UnionChina

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260

G20

Indonesia

Chinese Taipei

Thailand

Korea, Rep. of

EU

China


0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

G20

India

Thailand

Korea, Rep. of

Malaysia

Chinese Taipei

China


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

G20

Indonesia

Korea, Rep. of

China


Japan

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

G20

India

United States

Malaysia

Thailand

Japan

China


Korea, Rep. of

- 35 -

Note: Argentina; Indonesia; Japan; Korea, Republic of; and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (at GCC level) initiated AD investigations only.


Sunset Reviews

3.34. This Section examines the effect the global financial crisis may have had on AD and CVD actions, by analysing the extent to which measures imposed following the financial crisis have

been extended or have expired (or have otherwise been terminated) - suggesting that the financial crisis could have been a factor that contributed to the imposition of the measure. This Section, therefore, examines measures imposed as a result of investigations initiated in 2008, before the financial crisis, as well as 2009 and 2010, when the full effects of the financial crisis were being felt.14

3.35. The relevant WTO Agreements stipulate that AD and CVD measures can remain in force only

for as long as necessary to counteract injury caused by dumped or subsidised imports, and must expire no later than five years after their imposition unless it is determined, through a review, that

removal of a measure would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping or subsidisation and injury. In such a case, the measure can be extended for up to a further five years. This review process is often referred to as a sunset review. Investigating authorities generally invite applications for a sunset review before a measure expires, and in the absence of a review, they allow the measure to lapse.

14 Given the application requirements for anti-dumping and countervailing investigations, it is assumed

that investigations in response to the financial crisis would not have been initiated before January 2009.

Mexico Russian Federation

United States


Chart TR.4 (continued)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

G20

Japan

Spain

Korea, Rep. of

United States

India

China


0 5 10 15 20

G20

Brazil

Chinese Taipei

Macao, China

Hong Kong, China

Ukraine

China


0 5 10 15 20

G20

Korea, Rep. of

Netherlands

Malaysia

India

Brazil

China


South Africa

0 20 40 60 80

G20

Egypt

Indonesia

Malaysia

Korea. Rep. of

India

China


Turkey

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

G20

Viet Nam

Turkey

Chinese Taipei

India

Korea, Rep. of

China


Note: Argentina, Indonesia, Japan, Korea Republic of, Mexico, and Saudi Arabia (at GCC level) initiated anti-dumping investigations only.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

G20

Spain

Poland

Italy

Korea, Rep. of

China


Saudi Arabia,

Kingdom of

- 36 -

3.36. As at 31 December 2017, measures imposed as a result of investigations initiated in 2008-2010 are in various stages of their lifecycle, with some measures are under review15, some have been extended and some have expired. Chart 3.7 shows the status of AD and CVD measures resulting from investigations initiated in 2008, 2009 and 2010 by G20 members.

Chart 3.7 Status of measures resulting from AD and CVD investigations initiated in 2008, 2009 and 2010 for G20 members as at 31 December 2017


3.37. All of the 155 and 136 measures resulting from investigations initiated in 2008 and 2009, respectively by G20 members have now been subject to expiry action (either a sunset review or termination). Only one of the 100 measures resulting from investigations initiated in 2010 has not yet been subject to any expiry action.

3.38. Table 3.10 shows the proportion of measures that were due to expire for which a sunset review has been conducted; noting that measures not reviewed will automatically expire. For

measures resulting from investigations initiated in 2009 ("the 2009 measures"), 72% were reviewed, slightly higher than the 67% found for 2008 ("the 2008 measures"). Thus, a broadly similar proportion of the 2008 measures (investigations started before the financial crisis) and 2009 measures (investigations started after the financial crisis had begun) expired without review.

Table 3.10 Proportion of expiring measures that were subject to a sunset review for G20 members (based on the year the investigation was initiated)

Expiring measures Investigation initiated in

2008 2009 2010a

Not reviewed 33% 28% 22% Reviewed 67% 72% 78%

a Only 72 measures resulting from investigations initiated in 2010 have so far expired or been subject to review.


15 A sunset review must be initiated prior to the expiration date of the measure, but the measure may

remain in force after this date pending the outcome of the review.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2008 2009 2010

Original measure Under review Extended No longer in effect

Chart TR.5

Status of measures resulting from AD and CVD investigations initiated in 2008, 2009

and 2010 for G20 members as at 31 December 2017

WTO Secretariat.Source:

- 37 -

3.39. As at 31 December 2017, 104 sunset reviews had been completed for measures resulting from investigations initiated in 2008, 98 for 2009 and 55 for 2010, as shown in Table 3.11. For measures resulting from investigations initiated in 2008 and 2009, the relevant G20 member found that the expiry of the measure would lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping/subsidization and injury and extended the measures for 90% of all the measures imposed. For measures resulting from investigations initiated in 2010 G20 members decided to

extend the measures in 78% of completed reviews.

3.40. Based on the data currently available, there is no discernible change in extension versus expiry of measures coinciding with the financial crisis. As further time passes and additional data become available, other trends may reveal themselves.

Table 3.11 Results from completed reviews (based on the year the investigation was initiated)

Investigation initiated in

2008 2009 2010

Number of completed reviews 104 98 55 Measure extended 90% 92% 78% Expiry of measure 10% 8% 22%


Safeguard Measures

3.41. Unlike AD and CVD measures, safeguard measures are intended to be temporary measures taken in response to increased imports of goods that are causing serious injury and are imposed

on products from all exporting countries.16 Thus, safeguards are subject to different rules and timelines than AD and CVD measures and are not directly comparable to these other types of trade remedies.

3.42. Table 3.12 shows safeguard initiations and Table 3.13 shows safeguard impositions by G20 members. The number of initiations stayed flat between 2016 and 2017, while the number of impositions increased. The major users remained relatively inactive. For example, Indonesia,

which had been imposing on average three safeguard measures per year between 2011 and 2015, did not impose any measure in 2016 and 2017. Conversely, new users have appeared. For example, the GCC countries have initiated three safeguard investigations in 2016 and 2017. This was the first time they resorted to the safeguard instrument.

3.43. These short term trends should be seen against the backdrop of a longer trend where initiations have fallen from a recent high of 13 in 2014, and impositions have fallen from a recent high of 9 also in 2014 (Table 3.14)

16 With exception of special and differential treatment provide for developing countries in Article 9.1 of

the Safeguards Agreement.

- 38 -

Table 3.12 Safeguard initiations by G20 members

G20 member Jan-June

2016 July-Dec

2016 Jan-June

2017 July-Dec

2017 2016 2017

China 0 1 0 0 1 0

India 1 0 0 1 1 1

Saudi Arabia, Kingdom ofa 1 1 0 1 2 1

South Africab 1 1 0 0 2 0

Turkey 0 0 2 0 0 2

United States 0 0 2 0 0 2

Total 3 3 4 2 6 6

a Investigations are initiated at the level of the GCC. b Notified by South Africa, but investigations are initiated by the Southern African Customs Union (SACU) on behalf of all of its members collectively.


Table 3.13 Safeguard impositions by G20 members

G20 Member Jan-June

2016 July-Dec

2016 Jan-June

2017 July-Dec

2017 2016 2017

China 0 0 1 0 0 1

India 1 1 0 0 2 0

Saudi Arabia, Kingdom ofa 0 0 1 0 0 1

South Africab 0 0 0 1 0 1

Turkey 0 0 0 1 0 1

Total 1 1 2 2 2 4

a Notified by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia but the measure applies on a GCC-wide basis.

b Notified by South Africa, but the measure applies on a SACU-wide basis.


Table 3.14 Total G20 initiations and impositions

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Total G20 initiations 10 7 13 7 13 4 6 6

Total G20 impositions 0 9 4 2 9 4 2 4


3.44. It is noteworthy that the United States and China have resorted to the safeguard instrument recently. China initiated its safeguard investigation on sugar in 2016 and imposed a measure in 2017. The last time China imposed a safeguard measure was in November 2002 (on steel products). The United States initiated two safeguard investigations, one on solar cells and the other on washing machines in 2017. While not included in the statistics above, the United States

imposed these two measures in February 2018. The last time the United States imposed a safeguard measure was in March 2002 (on steel products). Also not included in the statistics above, is the European Union's safeguard investigation on steel products in March 2018. The last

time the European Union initiated a safeguard investigation was in 2002 (on steel products).

- 39 -

3.3 Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)17

3.45. Under the SPS Agreement, WTO Members are obliged to provide advance notice of intention to introduce new or modified SPS measures18, or to notify immediately when emergency measures are imposed. The main objective of complying with the SPS notification obligations is to inform other Members about new or changed regulations that may significantly affect trade. Therefore, an increased number of notifications does not automatically imply greater use of protectionist

measures, but rather enhanced transparency regarding these measures.

3.46. G20 economies rank amongst the main "notifiers" of SPS measures, accounting for 67% of all regular notifications (including addenda), and 34% of emergency notifications (including addenda), submitted to the WTO from 1 January 1995 until 30 April 2018.

3.47. For the period 1 October 2017 to 30 April 2018, Brazil submitted the greatest number of notifications to the WTO. Notifications by Brazil accounted for around 18% of SPS notifications

submitted by G20 economies in that period.

3.48. Many G20 members are following the recommendation to notify SPS measures, even when these are based on a relevant international standard, thus increasing transparency. Of the 347 regular notifications (excluding addenda) made by G20 members from 1 October 2017 to 30 April 2018, 31% indicated that an international standard, guideline or recommendation was relevant to the notified measure (out of which, 74.8% had referred to Codex, 19.6% to IPPC, and 5.6% to OIE). Furthermore, the notification formats include an entry enquiring whether the notified

regulation conforms to the relevant international standard. Of the notifications that have identified a relevant international standard, 70% indicated that the measure was in conformity with the existing international standard, guideline or recommendation. The 30% of notifications, which did not indicate that the measure was in conformity with the existing international standard, had identified Codex as the relevant international standard-setting body. Regarding emergency notifications for the same period, 81% of the emergency measures notified by G20 members indicated that an international standard, guideline or recommendation was relevant to the notified

measure. All of these notifications indicated that the measure was in conformity with an existing international standard, guideline or recommendation.

3.49. The objective most frequently identified in the SPS measures notified by G20 economies

during the reviewed period is food safety accounting for 70% of the notifications.19 Food safety is a particularly predominant objective in the G20 members' notifications as the vast majority of notified measures are related to Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) and pesticides, and in many

notifications, both keywords were identified.

3.50. Measures maintained by G20 members are often discussed in the SPS Committee. Around 73% of all STCs raised in the SPS Committee to date are on measures maintained by G20 economies. Moreover, the top ten WTO Members, in terms of complaints about implemented measures, are all G20 economies.

17 Information presented in this Section has been retrieved from the SPS Information Management System (SPS IMS: http://spsims.wto.org). This Section is based on notifications to the WTO for the period

1 October 2017 to 30 April 2018, and builds on the previous G20 report (9 November 2017), which covered notifications up until end-September 2017. Specific trade concerns (STCs) are only raised at SPS Committee meetings. The information in this Section summarizes the STCs raised at the 2-3 November 2017 and 1-2 March 2018 SPS Committee meetings. 18 Transparency obligations are contained in Article 7 and Annex B of the SPS Agreement. Annex B of the SPS Agreement requires that WTO Members notify measures whose content is not substantially the same as that of an international standard, guideline or recommendation, and when the measure may have a significant effect on trade. However, the Recommended Procedures for Implementing the Transparency Provisions of the SPS Agreement, adopted by the SPS Committee in 2008 (G/SPS/7/Rev.3), recommend that Members also notify measures which are based on the relevant international standards, and provide a broad interpretation of effects on trade.

19 The objective of an SPS measure falls under one or more of the following categories: (i) food safety; (ii) animal health; (iii) plant protection; (iv) protect humans from animal/plant pest or disease; and (v) protect territory from other damages from pests. WTO Members are required to identify the purpose of the measure in their notifications. It is not uncommon for more than one objective to be identified for a measure.

http://spsims.wto.org/

- 40 -

Chart 3.8 Regular SPS notifications and international standards

Note: Codex Alimentarius (Codex), World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC).


3.51. A total of 23 out of 34 STCs were raised or discussed in relation to measures maintained by G20 members in the SPS Committee meetings of 2-3 November 2017 and 1-2 March 2018. Eight were raised for the first time, and 15 had been discussed in previous meetings. Four STCs raised for the first time in November 2017 were discussed again in March 2018.

3.52. The new STCs raised at the November 2017 and March 2018 SPS Committee meetings regarding measures applied by G20 economies relate to:

EU maximum residue levels for acrinathrin, metalaxyl and thiabendazole (raised by Peru, November 2017 (STC 428));

EU maximum level of cadmium in foodstuffs (raised by Peru, November 2017 (STC 430));

South Africa's import restrictions on poultry due to Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (raised by the European Union, November 2017 (STC 431));

EU restrictions on poultry meat due to Salmonella detection (raised by Brazil, November 2017 (STC 432));

India's fumigation requirements for teak tree wood (raised by Colombia, November 2017 (STC 434));

Mexico's market access requirement for casein products (raised by India, March 2018

(STC 436));

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's temporary ban on the importation of fish, crustaceans and other aquatic animal products (raised by Viet Nam, March 2018 (STC 437));

United States import restrictions on apples and pears (raised by the European Union, March 2018 (STC 439)).

Codex

74.8%

OIE

5.6%

IPPC

19.6%


Chart 1.SPS

Regular SPS notifications (excluding addenda) and international standards

None

69%

Relevant

international standard

31%

- 41 -

3.53. Of the 15 previously raised STCs regarding measures applied by G20 members discussed in the November 2017 or March 2018 meetings, nine of them address persistent problems that have been discussed at least five times:

lack of transparency for certain SPS measures applied by China (raised by Israel and the United States, March 2004). This STC (184) has been subsequently discussed in the Committee five times and has gathered the support of twelve Members;

general import restrictions due to Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) applied by certain Members, specifically Australia, China, Japan and the Republic of Korea. This STC (193) was initially raised by the European Union in the June 2004 meeting and subsequently by the United States in February 2007. It has been subsequently discussed 32 times in the Committee, gathering the support of three other Members;

European Union's revised proposal for categorization of compounds as endocrine disruptors

(raised by the United States in March 2014, joined by Argentina in October 2015). This STC (382) has been subsequently discussed in the Committee ten times and has gathered the

support of 38 Members;

Russian Federation's import restrictions on processed fishery products from Estonia and Latvia (raised by European Union in July 2015). This STC (390) has been subsequently discussed in the Committee eight times;

China's import restrictions due to African swine fever (raised by the European Union in

July 2015). This STC (392) has been subsequently discussed in the Committee eight times;

Republic of Korea's import restrictions due to African swine fever (raised by the European Union in July 2015). This STC (393) has been subsequently discussed eight times in the Committee;

China's proposed amendments to the implementation regulations on safety assessment of agricultural GMOs (raised by Paraguay and the United States in July 2015). This STC (395) has been subsequently discussed six times in the Committee;

China's import restrictions due to Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (raised by European Union in March 2016, joined by the United States in July 2017). This STC (406) has been subsequently discussed five times in the Committee;

Russian Federation's import restrictions on certain animal products from European Union (Germany) (raised by European Union in June 2016). This STC (411) has been subsequently discussed five times in the Committee.

3.54. Out of the 28 STCs raised on measures implemented by G20 economies 13 concerned food safety measures, nine animal health, three plant health, and three related to other types of concerns (i.e. control, inspection and approval procedures).

3.55. In September 2017, the Secretariat contacted all WTO Members who had raised STCs that had not been discussed in the previous year, to request an update on their status. For the STCs involving G20 economies, 11 WTO Members responded and indicated that 16 STCs had been resolved, and seven STCs had been partially resolved. An STC was reported as partially resolved

when (i) it was only reported as resolved by some of the WTO Members that had raised the STC; (ii) trade had resumed for some, but not all, of the products covered by the STC; or (iii) trade had resumed with one of the WTO Members maintaining the measure subject to the STC.20

20 This information was circulated in document RD/SPS/28/Rev.1 of 19 February 2018.

- 42 -

Box 3.2 Enhancing monitoring and transparency in SPS and TBT

Accessing relevant information on SPS or TBT product requirements in export markets can be an important challenge, especially for SMEs. The WTO helps address this potential trade barrier through a combination of transparency requirements included in the SPS and TBT Agreements and online tools that make information easily accessible: the SPS and TBT Information Management Systems (SPS/TBT IMSs) and ePing. WTO Members are required to notify proposed SPS and TBT measures if they may significantly affect international trade. Each year, the WTO receives more than 3,500 such notifications. Publicly available online tools help stakeholders find notifications of relevance to their trade: - SPS IMS www.spsims.wto.org, - TBT IMS www.tbtims.wto.org, and - ePing www.epingalert.org. The SPS/TBT IMSs are search-platforms that help find, among others, SPS or TBT notifications by using parameters such as products, notifying Member and objective. The ePing is an online alert system allowing users (governments, economic operators, civil society) to receive daily or weekly email alerts about SPS and TBT notifications covering products and markets of interest to them. Timely access to notifications is crucial given the 60-day period that normally should be provided for submitting comments on regulations, usually still in draft-form. The ePing platform also facilitates dialogue among the public and private sectors to discuss and share information on notifications of concern, allowing stakeholders to address potential trade problems at an early stage of the regulatory lifecycle.


3.4 Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)21

3.56. The G20 economies are the most frequent users of the TBT Committee's transparency mechanisms. Together, they have submitted almost half of all TBT notifications since 1995.22

Regulations maintained by G20 members also represent the vast majority (around 80%) of all measures discussed in the TBT Committee since 1995.

3.57. Under the TBT Agreement, WTO Members are required to notify their intention to introduce new or modified TBT measures, or to notify adopted emergency measures immediately. The principal objective of complying with the TBT notification obligations is to inform other Members

about new or changed regulations that may significantly affect trade.23 Therefore, an increased number of notifications does not necessarily imply greater use of unnecessarily trade-restrictive

measures. Rather, TBT notification obligations are meant to promote enhanced transparency regarding measures taken to address legitimate policy objectives, e.g. the protection of human, animal or plant life or health, or the environment.24

3.58. From 1 October 2017 to 30 April 2018, G20 economies submitted 424 new regular notifications of TBT measures out of 1,148 by all WTO Members (37%). This represents a slight

increase compared to the new regular notifications submitted during the preceding seven-month period.25 The top-five notifying G20 members - covering around 60% of all new G20

21 For the TBT Section, the "review period" covers 1 October 2017 to 30 April 2018. 22 Since 1995, over 23,000 new (regular) notifications of TBT measures have been submitted by WTO

Members, around 10,500 of which (45%) by G20 economies. Overall, around 31,500 new (regular) and follow-up (revisions, addenda, etc.) notifications of TBT measures have been submitted by WTO Members since

1995, around 15,000 of which (48%) by G20 economies. 23 Under the TBT Agreement, WTO Members are not required to notify all proposed TBT measures

(technical regulations or conformity assessment procedures). Rather, as a minimum, they are only required to notify those measures that may have a significant effect on trade of other Members and are not in accordance with a relevant international standard (in the case of technical regulations), or relevant guides or recommendations issued by international standardizing bodies (in the case of conformity assessment procedures). However, the TBT Committee, in its Sixth Triennial Review, encouraged Members, "for the purpose of enhancing predictability and transparency in situations where it is difficult to establish or foresee whether a draft technical regulation or conformity assessment procedure may have a 'significant effect on trade of other Members', to notify such measures."

24 TBT Agreement obligations are also subject to 25 separate Special and Differential Treatment (S&D) provisions, conferring developing country Members, and LDC Members in particular, with certain flexibilities. The TBT Agreement contains more S&D provisions than any other WTO Agreement apart from the GATT 1994.

25 From 1 March to 30 September 2017, 33% of all 1,148 new regular notifications were submitted by G20 economies.

http://www.epingalert.org/

- 43 -

notifications - were Brazil (63), the United States (54), China and the European Union (51 each), and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (39).

3.59. Of the 424 new regular notifications made by G20 members that were received during the review period, the majority indicated as main objectives26 the protection of human health or safety. The remaining notifications related to the protection of the environment, quality requirements and the prevention of deceptive practices and consumer protection. Although

national security does not feature among the most indicated objectives, since 2007 (with the exception of 2012) there has been a marked increase in TBT measures notified in which national security is mentioned as an objective. Among the 51 regular notifications indicating national security as their objective, 31 (60%) were submitted by G20 economies.

Chart 3.9 Regular notifications indicating national security as their objective, 1995-2017


3.60. In terms of follow-up notifications27, G20 economies notified 198 (40%) out of 495 submitted by all WTO Members during the review period. During the preceding seven-month period, 219 (47%) follow-up notifications were submitted by G20 economies. The continuing and frequent use by all WTO Members of the follow-up notifications is a positive development as they help increase transparency and predictability across the measures' regulatory lifecycle.

26 A TBT measure may pursue a variety of legitimate objectives, although historically the majority falls

under one of the following categories: the protection of human, animal or plant life or health, or the environment. Members are required to identify the purpose of the measure in their notifications. It is not uncommon that more than one objective is identified for a measure.

27 "Follow-up notifications are called "addenda", "corrigenda", or "supplements". They can also be in the form of "revisions" when the original measure has been substantially re-drafted prior to adoption or entry into force. A revision replaces the original notification. They are linked to the original notification of a measure, and include additional pertinent information, for example: that a comment period on a notification has been extended (addenda), that a measure has been withdrawn or revoked (addenda), or when a measure is substantially redrafted prior to adoption or entry into force (revision), or when the adopted final text of a measure becomes available (addenda). See G/TBT/35 for further information on different types of TBT notifications.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1995 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017


Chart 1.[TBT]

Regular notifications indicating national security as their objective, 1995-2017

- 44 -

3.61. WTO Members use the TBT Committee as a forum for discussing trade issues related to specific measures (technical regulations, standards or conformity assessment procedures) maintained by other Members. These STCs normally relate to proposed draft measures notified to the TBT Committee, or to the implementation of existing measures. Issues raised can range from simple requests for additional information and clarifications, to questions on the consistency of measures with TBT Agreement disciplines. Depending on the extent of the trade-restrictiveness

and importance of the issue to the Members raising the STC, the same measure may come up at one or more meetings of the TBT Committee. For example, an STC may be discussed at only one meeting, as a new STC, and subsequently a resolution to the trade concern may be found. Alternatively, an STC may be discussed at subsequent meetings, as a previously raised STC. Previously raised STCs are usually reserved for long-standing and more serious concerns. Since 1995, WTO Members have raised 554 new STCs.

3.62. Regulations maintained by G20 economies have also continued to represent the majority of the measures discussed - both as new STCs and previously raised STCs - in the two TBT Committee meetings that took place during the review period in 8-9 November 2017 and 21-22 March 2018. A total of 121 STCs were discussed in these two meetings, 13 of which were

new, while the remaining 108 were previously raised.

3.63. Table 3.15, below, lists all eight new STCs raised on measures maintained by G20 economies during the review period. These G20 measures covered a wide range of

products/issues, including: solid wastes, toys, processed food and food products, tobacco products, medicinal products and biofuels (renewable energy).

Table 3.15 New STCs raised in the TBT Committee meetings of November 2017, and March 2018

New STCs raised in the TBT Committee meetings of November 2017, and March 2018

China: Concerning Catalogue of Solid Wastes Forbidden to Import into China (ID 545) (raised by Japan, the United States, European Union, Australia and Canada); India: Concerning amended regulation on toy imports (ID 546) (raised by European Union, China, United States, Mexico and Canada); China: Concerning certification requirements for processed foods (ID 547) (raised by European Union, United States, Guatemala, Singapore and Chinese Taipei); European Union: Concerning the establishment and operation of a traceability system for tobacco products (ID 550) (raised by Cuba);

China: Concerning Chinese Environmental protection control standards for imported solid waste as raw materials (ID 551) (raised by European Union, the United States, Australia, Japan and Canada);

European Union: Concerning amendments to the Renewable Energy Directive (2009/28/EC) (ID 553) (raised by Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala and Nigeria); European Union: Concerning Laws, Regulations, procedures and guidelines on Marketing authorization for medicinal products (ID 554) (raised by India); European Union: Concerning application of Regulation No. 1169/2011 and Regulation (EC) No. 1924/2006 regarding the labelling of food products, in not prohibiting or examining the use of "palm oil free" labels (ID 555) (raised by Colombia, Indonesia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Thailand and Malaysia);


3.64. As in previous periods, the vast majority (around 85%) of the 108 previously raised STCs discussed during the review period concerned measures maintained by G20 economies, namely: China (32), the European Union (20)28, the Russian Federation (12)29, India (11), the Republic of

Korea (5), Brazil (4), Indonesia (4) and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (3).

3.65. The majority of previously raised STCs (57%) were raised at one or two Committee

meetings, 26% were raised three to five times and 17% more than five times (see Chart 3.10). The top-six "persistent" STCs (raised more than 16 times in TBT Committee meetings) that were discussed during the review period are listed in Table 3.16.

28 Including two STCs with respect to measures from Ireland and Italy, respectively. 29 Including two "joint STCs" with respect to measures taken by the Russian Federation, Kazakhstan,

and the Kyrgyz Republic.

- 45 -

Chart 3.10 STCs raised in the TBT Committee, 1995-2017

(number of times)

Source: WTO Secretariat. Twenty-Third Annual Review of the Implementation and Operation of the TBT Agreement, G/TBT/40 (12 March 2018), Chart 27.

Table 3.16 "Persistent" STCs raised between 1 October 2017 and 30 April 2018

"Persistent" STCs India: Pneumatic tyres and tubes for automotive vehicles (ID 133) - raised 34 times since 2006 India: New Telecommunications-related Rules (Department of Telecommunications, No. 842-725/2005-VAS/Vol. III (3 December 2009); No. 10-15/2009-AS-III/193 (18 March 2010); and No. 10-15/2009-AS.III/Vol. II/(Pt.)/(25-29) (28 July 2010); Department of Telecommunications, No. 10-15/2009-AS.III/Vol. II/(Pt.)/(30) (28 July 2010) and accompanying template, "Security and Business Continuity Agreement") (ID 274) - raised 22 times since 2010

China: Provisions for the Administration of Cosmetics Application Acceptance (ID 296) - raised 22 times since 2011 China: Requirements for information security products, including, inter alia, the Office of State Commercial Cryptography Administration (OSCCA) 1999 Regulation on commercial encryption products and its on-going revision and the Multi-Level Protection Scheme (MLPS) (ID 294) - raised 21 times since 2011 Korea, Republic of: Regulation on Registration and Evaluation of Chemical Material (ID 305) - raised 18 times since 2011 Indonesia: Technical Guidelines for the Implementation of the Adoption and Supervision of Indonesian National Standards for Obligatory Toy Safety (ID 328) raised 18 times since 2011


3.66. Some of the new and previously raised STCs discussed during the review period involved regulations in the area of renewable energy. Box 3.3 takes a closer look these types of measures as notified to, and discussed in, the TBT Committee over the years.

1-2 Meetings57%

3-5 Meetings26%

>5 Meetings17%

Chart1.[TBT]

Number of times an STC is raised in the TBT Committee, 1995-2016

Source: WTO Secretariat. Twenty Second Annual Review of the Implementation and Operation of

the TBT Agreement, G/TBT/39/Rev.1 (24 May 2017).

- 46 -

Box 3.3 Regulations on renewable energy sources and the TBT Agreement

In 2015, renewables accounted for almost 23% of global electricity generation. According to forecasts, the share of renewable energy in global power generation will rise to over 30% by 2020.a Since 1995, there have been 162 regular notifications submitted to the TBT Committed related to renewable energy sources ("renewables notifications").b The number of renewables notifications has fluctuated from year to year, with the highest number (22) submitted in 2010, a significant increase since 1995, when only one renewables notification was submitted.c The vast majority of these notifications (96%)d concern technical regulations. A significant share of the renewables notifications (around 80%) have been submitted by both developing and developed WTO Members, with LDC members submitting the remaining 20%. Most of such notifications have been made by African (51), North American (30) and European (29) WTO Members. Individually, the top notifying members are Uganda (25), the United States (24) and Kenya (20). More than half of the notified renewables regulationse addressed the protection of the environment. Other objectives covered by renewables notifications also include the protection of human health and safety (21%) followed by the prevention of deceptive practices and consumer protection (13%) and quality requirements (12%). Since 2009, Members have been raising STCs in the TBT Committee specifically on measures regulating renewable energy sources ("renewables STCs"). A total of six renewables STCs have been raised, five of which concerned biofuels-related measures. All six renewables STCs targeted measures addressing environmental protection objectives (some of these measures also indicated quality requirements and/or the protection of human health and safety as their objectives). Members were mainly concerned about "transparency" and the "measure's rationale" when raising renewables related trade measures in the TBT Committee.f Other reasons of concern dealt with: (i) "further information and clarification'', "international standards" and "unnecessary barriers to trade" (indicated in five STCs) and (ii) "discrimination" (indicated in three STCs). In terms of substance, the specific issues discussed under these STCs included: the calculation methods for determining sustainability criteria; minimum volume of biodiesel to be used in the national transportation fuel supply; certification procedure for biodiesel; establishing compulsory percentages of blends of ethanol; market access for thin-film solar panels; and discriminatory treatment against biofuels and bioliquids produced from palm oil and other types of vegetable oils. These six renewables STCs concerned measures by both developed (4) and developing (2) WTO Members. The EU measures have been subject to half of these STCs. Other WTO Members subject to these STCs were the United States, Colombia and the Republic of Korea. In the aggregate, 11 WTO Members have raised these six STCs,g with developing Members accounting for the vast majority (9 out of 11). Individually, Argentina, Indonesia and Malaysia have been the most active members in raising renewables STCs. They have been involved in three STCs each. The European Union and the United States follow the list with two STCs each. _______________

Note: This box considers only notifications and STCs concerning TBT regulations and measures addressing renewable energy sources specifically. Apart from such measures, renewable energy sources can, and commonly are, also subject to other regulations covering a variety of products and/or situations, for instance: general inspection of voltage of electrical installations; or testing the safety standards of vehicles run by biofuels and biodiesel; or grid connections enabling physical connections, transmission and distribution; or energy conservation programs including energy conservation standards for uninterruptible power supplies. Renewable energy sources can also be affected by measures regulating general fuel quality, controls of emissions in the energy sector or land use and noise regulations. The scope of measures affecting renewable energy sources is broader than included in this box.

a Source: International Energy Agency, Renewables 2017. b As defined by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), renewable energy "includes all forms of

energy produced from renewable sources in a sustainable manner, including bioenergy, geothermal energy, hydropower, ocean energy, solar energy and wind energy". Commonly-used renewable energy sources include biomass (i.e. wood and wood waste, municipal solid waste, landfill gas and biogas, ethanol and biodiesel) hydropower, geothermal, wind and solar.

c Notifications submitted from January 1995 to 1 May 2018. d The remaining portion of renewables notifications mostly concern conformity assessment. e Around 52% of 162 renewables notifications or 84 notifications. f The fact that only two of the six measures targeted in these renewables STCs have been notified to the TBT

Committee seems to correlate with the fact that "transparency" was one of the most frequent issues of concern. g Note: STCs can be raised, maintained or supported by more than one Member.


- 47 -

3.5 Trade Concerns Raised in Other Bodies

3.67. A number of trade concerns raised in formal meetings of various WTO bodies involved G20 members.30 This Section provides a factual overview of such concerns raised between mid-October 2017 and mid-May 2018. The trade concerns covered in this Section have neither the status nor the procedural framework of the STCs raised in the SPS and TBT Committees. Nevertheless, they provide an interesting and up-to-date insight into the trade issues which are being discussed

across the WTO and, as such, add important transparency. This Section does not reproduce the full substantive description of the trade concerns outlined by WTO Members, but provides a reference to the formal meeting(s) where a particular issue featured. For the full account and context of concerns, G20 members are invited to consult the formal records of the respective WTO bodies. The list of concerns and issues mentioned in this Section is not exhaustive and is limited to measures implemented by G20 economies.31

3.68. At the 7 March 2018 of the General Council (GC) meeting32 concerns were raised on possible trade-restrictive measures by a Member (raised by China under "Other Business" – 18 delegations intervened) and at the 8 May 2018 GC meeting33 concerns were raised on (i) the United States'

section 232 investigations and measures on steel and aluminium products (raised by China – 17 other delegations intervened) and; (ii) the United States' investigations and measures under section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (raised by China – 10 other delegations intervened).

3.69. At the meeting of the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG) on 10 November 201734, new

concerns were raised on (i) India's quantitative restrictions on imports of mungo beans (raised by Australia); (ii) Mexico's AD duties calculated on the basis of "non-market economy" methodologies (raised by Russian Federation); and (iii) China's customs duties on certain semiconductors (raised by European Union; Chinese Taipei; and United States).

3.70. At that meeting, concerns were again raised about (i) India's customs duties on ICT products - previously considered under a broader title (raised by Canada, European Union, Norway, Japan, Chinese Taipei, and United States); (ii) the United States Section 232

investigations on steel and aluminium products (raised by the Russian Federation); (iii) the United States Seafood Import Monitoring Programme (SIMP) (raised by China); (iv) Indonesia's import and export restricting policies and practices (raised by European Union, Japan and United States); (v) the Russian Federation's trade restricting practices (raised by European Union); and

(vi) Brazil's restrictions on Banana imports (raised by Ecuador).

3.71. At the CTG meeting on 23-26 March 201835, new concerns were raised under the regular

agenda on: (i) the United States 232 investigations and measures on imports of steel and aluminium (raised by China and Russian Federation);36 (ii) Mexico's customs processing fee (raised by Ecuador); (iii) China's new export control law (raised by Japan); (iv) China's measures restricting imports of scrap materials (raised by United States); (v) the European Union Directive 2009/28/EC on renewable energy (raised by Malaysia); (vi) the United States safeguard measures against imported crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells and residential washers (raised by China) and, under Other Business; (vii) the United States Section 301 (raised by China) and

(viii) U.S. certification on aviation security equipment (raised by China).

3.72. At the same meeting, the CTG again considered trade concerns that had already been brought to its attention at prior meetings: (i) Indonesia's import and export policies (raised by European Union, Japan and United States); (ii) India's quantitative restrictions on imports of mungo beans (raised by Australia); (iii) India's customs duties on ICT products (raised by Canada, China, European Union, Japan, Norway, Chinese Taipei and United States); (iv) the United

30 This Section does not include SPS and TBT Committees (covered separately) or issues brought to the

Dispute Settlement Body. Some of the trade concerns raised may subsequently have become the subject of a dispute.

31 G20 economies are encouraged to communicate to the WTO's Trade Policy Review Division the issues on non-tariff measures which they have raised in WTO bodies and which they believe are relevant to the monitoring effort.

32 Document WT/GC/M/171. 33 Document WT/GC/M/172 (forthcoming). 34 Document G/C/M/130. 35 Document G/C/M/131 (forthcoming). 36 This issue was previously raised at the CTG when the measures had not yet entered into force.

- 48 -

States measures related to imports of fish and seafood products (raised by China); (v) the Russian Federation's trade restricting practices (raised by European Union and United States); (vi) China's customs duties on certain integrated circuits (raised by European Union, Japan, Chinese Taipei and United States; and (vii) import levy by WTO Members of the African Union (raised by the European Union and the United States).

3.73. At the 26 April 2018 meeting of the Committee on Market Access37 new and persistent trade

concerns were raised on: (i) China's customs duties on certain integrated circuits (raised by the European Union, Japan, Chinese Taipei, and the United States);38 (ii) India's customs duties on telecommunication and other products (raised by Canada, China, European Union, Japan, Norway, Chinese Taipei, and the United States and supported by Australia; Korea, Republic of; Norway; Singapore; Switzerland; and Thailand);39 (iii) the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's excise tax on energy drinks and carbonated soft drink products (raised by the European Union and Switzerland);

(iv) the United States' prohibited electronic equipment (raised by China); (v) India's restrictions on the importation of mungo beans and yellow peas (raised by Australia) and; (vi) the European Union's (Croatia) regulation of the importation and sale of certain oil and biodiesel products (raised by the Russian Federation).40

3.74. At the meetings of the Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products on 6 November 201741, trade concerns continued to be raised regarding India's Customs Notifications No. 11/2014 and No. 56/2017 on the 10% import duty increase on

certain telecommunication equipment (bound at duty-free) (raised by Canada; European Union; Japan; Korea, Republic of; Norway; Chinese Taipei and United States and echoed by Australia; Thailand; Switzerland and Viet Nam). In addition, concerns were reiterated with respect to China's application of tariffs on certain semiconductor devices, i.e. "multi-component integrated circuits" (MCOs), (raised by the European Union; Japan; Chinese Taipei and the United States and echoed by Korea, Republic of; and Thailand).

3.75. At the meeting of the Committee on Import Licensing on 20 April 201842, new and

persistent trade concerns were raised as per Table 3.17 below.

Table 3.17 Concerns raised on import licensing measures

Measure implemented by Member(s) raising the concern Argentina Non-automatic licensing procedures on certain products a

European Union

Brazil Import restrictions of nitrocellulose for industrial useb European Union China Import licensing measures on importation of solid waste and recoverable materialsc

European Union, United State, shared by Japan, Republic of Korea, Australia, Canada

India Import licensing requirements on boric acid United States Import requirements for beans of the species vigna mungo hepper or vigna radiata wilczek and pigeon peas (cajanus cajan)

Australia, shared by European Union, United States, Ukraine, Canada and Japan

37 Includes issues raised under "other business". Document G/MA/M/67 (forthcoming). 38 The issue had been repeatedly raised in previous meetings as well as the ITA Committee. 39 The issue has been repeatedly raised in previous meetings of the Committee and other WTO bodies. 40 This issue had been previously raised in October 2016. 41 Documents G/IT/M/67. 42 Minutes G/LIC/M/47 (forthcoming).

- 49 -

Measure implemented by Member(s) raising the concern Indonesia Import licensing regime for cell phones, handheld computers and tablets

United States, shared by Chile

Import requirements related to milk supply and circulation

United States, shared by European Union, Switzerland, Chile, New Zealand

Russian Federation Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) certificate procedures on the importation of specified medicines and pharmaceutical productsd

European Union

a G/LIC/Q/ARG/16 b G/LIC/Q/BRA/22 c G/LIC/Q/CHN/27 d G/LIC/Q/RUS/4


3.76. At the meeting of the Committee on Customs Valuation on 6 November 2017 and

23 April 201843, concerns were repeated on Indonesia's status of PSI notifications (raised by

United States).

3.77. At the meetings of the Committee on Agriculture (CoA) on 17-18 October 2017 and 20 February 201844 and a number of questions and concerns were raised with respect to G20 members' individual notifications and on implementation-related issues. In the period from 11 October 2017 to 1 May 2018, 132 questions were discussed, including on individual notifications (72 questions), on Article 18.6 issues (57 questions on 20 implementation-related

issues) and on overdue notifications (three questions). Additional details regarding these questions and concerns can be found in Section 3.6 of this report.

3.78. At the meetings of the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices on 27 October 2016 and 27 April 201745, concerns were raised as per Table 3.18.

Table 3.18 Concerns raised on AD practices

Measure implemented by Member(s)

raising the concern

Brazil Investigation on hot-rolled steel Russian Federation Sunset review on PET films Turkey Canada

Investigation on silicon metal Lao PDR, Kazakhstan China Investigation on styrene monomers Korea, Republic of Investigation on broiler products Brazil Investigation on acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber Japan European Union Interim review on solar panels China Investigation on tubes and pipe fittings of stainless steel China India Investigation on sodium dichromate Turkey Investigation on resorcinol Japan Investigation on ammonium nitrate Russian Federation Measure on linear alkyl benzene Qatar Investigation on caustic soda Qatar Indonesia Sunset review on hot-rolled coil Kazakhstan Sunset review on hot-rolled plates Ukraine

43 Documents G/VAL/M/65 and G/VAL/M/66 (forthcoming). 44 Questions and responses to the issues raised under the review process in the CoA meetings on 17-18

October 2017 and 20 February 2018 are available in G/AG/W/170 issued on 12 December 2017 and G/AG/W/173 issued on 6 April 2018.

45 Minutes G/ADP/M/53 and G/ADP/M/54 (forthcoming), respectively.

- 50 -


raising the concern

Korea, Republic of Measure on stainless steel bar Japan Measure on ferrosilicon manganese Ukraine Mexico Measure on cold-rolled sheet Kazakhstan Russian Federation, Armenia, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyz Republic Investigation on herbicides European Union Turkey Investigation on unbleached kraftliner paper Brazil Measure on copper wire rod Ukraine United States Investigation on wire rod Russian Federation Investigations on colour-coated, hot-rolled, cold-rolled steel sheets and steel plates

Korea, Republic of

Administrative review on oil country tubular goods Korea, Republic of Investigation on biodiesel Indonesia Investigation on carbon and alloy steel wire rod Ukraine


3.79. Other additional issues and concerns were raised on: (i) the recent rapid increase in AD

measures, especially in the steel sector (raised by Japan); (ii) the European Union's and United States' "surrogate country methodology" in investigations (raised by China); (iii) India's methodology to calculate the amount of AD duties on investigations (raised by Japan); (iv) the length of the United States AD measures (raised by Japan); (v) the United States' practice of applying adverse facts available ("AFA") in investigations (raised by Korea, Republic of); (vi) the United States' methodology of regarding state-owned enterprises as one whole entity (raised by

China) and; (vii) the European Union's draft amendments to the Basic AD Regulation (raised by the Russian Federation).

3.80. At the meetings of the Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures46 on 24 October 2017 and 24 April 2018, concerns were raised on CVD duty actions as per Table 3.19.

Table 3.19 Concerns raised on CVD duty actions


raising the concern

European Union Investigation on hot-rolled steel China United States

Investigation on ripe olives European Union Measures on iron and steel products Turkey Investigation on silicon metal Australia and Kazakhstan Various investigations India


3.81. At the same meetings concerns were raised on subsidies as per Table 3.20.

Table 3.20 Concerns raised on subsidies


raising the concern

China Non-notification of alleged subsidies in the steel sector United States Non-notification of alleged subsidies in the fisheries sector United States Non-notification of alleged subsidies under the Internationally Well-known Brand Programme

United States

Requests for information on certain alleged subsidy programmes in the steel sector

European Union and United States

46 Minutes G/SCM/M/103 and G/SCM/M/105 (forthcoming), respectively.

- 51 -


raising the concern

India Export subsidies in the textile and apparel sector United States Export Subsidies (India's Graduation from Annex VII(b) of the Agreement)

United States

United States Request for information on certain alleged subsidy programmes China


3.82. Additional concerns were raised on: (i) elimination of export subsidies by the Members that received extensions under Article 27.4 of the SCM Agreement; (ii) low and declining level of

compliance with the notification and transparency obligations in the SCM Agreement; (iii) requests for information pursuant to Article 25.8 and 25.9 (proposal from the United States); (iv) enhancing fisheries subsidies transparency (raised by United States); (v) subsidies and overcapacity (raised by Canada, European Union, Japan, Mexico, and United States); (vi) Implementation of Paragraph 2 of the Ministerial Decision on Fisheries Subsidies (raised by Australia, Canada, European Union,

Iceland, New Zealand, Norway and United States).

3.83. At the meeting of the Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs) Committee on

6 November 201747 the following new or continuing issues were raised:

Table 3.21 Concerns raised at the TRIMs Committee


raising the concern

Argentina Act 27,263 on the development and strengthening of auto-partsa Mexico China Provisions on insurance system informatizationb United States Indonesia Requirements for 4G LTE mobile devicesc European Union; Japan;

United States Provisions in the energy sector (mining, oil and gas)d Canada; European Union; Japan;

United States Industry Law and Trade Lawe European Union; Japan Minimum local product requirement for modern retail sectorf European Union; Japan Measures relating to investment in the telecommunications sectorg Japan Requirements for dairy importation and distribution United States Russian Federation Measures implementing the Russian Federation's import substitution policyh

European Union; United States

Turkey Localization policy in the pharmaceutical sector European Union; United States

a See documents G/TRIMS/Q/ARG/1; G/TRIMS/Q/ARG/2; G/TRIMS/Q/ARG/3; and G/TRIMS/Q/ARG/4. b See document G/TRIMS/Q/CHN/1. c See documents G/TRIMS/W/148 and G/TRIMS/W/162. d See documents G/TRIMS/W/70; G/TRIMS/W/74; G/TRIMS/W/79; G/TRIMS/W/88; G/TRIMS/W/100;

G/TRIMS/W/108; G/TRIMS/W/123; G/TRIMS/W/128; G/TRIMS/W/137; and G/TRIMS/W/137/Corr.1. e See documents G/TRIMS/W/138; G/TRIMS/W/140; G/TRIMS/W/157; and G/TRIMS/W/158. f See documents G/TRIMS/W/139; G/TRIMS/W/141; G/TRIMS/W/159; and G/TRIMS/W/161. g See documents G/TRIMS/W/61; G/TRIMS/W/63; G/TRIMS/W/71; G/TRIMS/W/75; G/TRIMS/W/78;

G/TRIMS/W/80; G/TRIMS/W/86; G/TRIMS/W/96; G/TRIMS/W/104; G/TRIMS/W/131; G/TRIMS/W/154; G/TRIMS/W/160; and G/TRIMS/Q/IDN/1.

h See documents G/TRIMS/Q/RUS/4; G/TRIMS/Q/RUS/5; G/TRIMS/Q/RUS/6; G/TRIMS/Q/RUS/7; and G/TRIMS/Q/RUS/8.


3.84. At the meetings of the Committee on Safeguards48, on 23 October 2017 and 23 April 2018, concerns were raised on specific SG actions as per Table 3.22.

47 Minutes G/TRIMS/M/43.

- 52 -

Table 3.22 Concerns raised on specific SG actions

Measure Implemented by Member(s) raising the concern China Investigation on sugar Brazil, Australia, European Union European Union Investigation on Certain Steel Products Korea Republic of; Turkey; Argentina; China; Egypt;

Viet Nam; Chile; India India Investigation on Solar Cells European Union, Japan Indonesia Investigation on Flat-Rolled Product of Iron or Non-Alloy Steel

European Union

Investigation on Ceramic Flags and Paving, Hearth or Wall Tiles; Ceramic Mosaic Cubes and the Like

European Union, Japan

Saudi Arabia, Kingdom ofa Investigation on Flat-Rolled Products of Iron or Non-Alloy Steel

European Union

South Africa Investigation on Certain Flat Hot-Rolled Steel Products United States, Japan, European Union Turkey Investigation on Pneumatic Tires Ecuador, European Union, Japan

Investigation on Polyethylene Terephthalate European Union Investigation on Toothbrushes Ecuador Investigation on Wallpaper and Similar Wallcoverings European Union United States Investigation on Large Residential Washers Korea, Republic of: Viet Nam; China and Mexico Investigation on Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells European Union; Korea, Republic of; Australia; Japan;

the Philippines; China; Singapore; Switzerland; Norway; Malaysia

Measures Taken Following Section 232 Investigations

China; Russian Federation; Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of; Turkey; Norway; Switzerland; India and Singapore

a Investigations are initiated at the level of the GCC.


3.85. At the meetings of the Working Party on State Trading Enterprises on 9 November 201749, a

trade concern was raised on India's Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (raised by European Union).

3.86. Additional concerns were raised on: (i) the non-notification by the Russian Federation of its

state trading enterprises (questions from the European Union and the United States); and (ii) the overall poor level of compliance among Members with the notification obligations of Article XVII of GATT 1994 regarding state trading enterprises.

3.87. At the meeting of the Council for Trade in Services (CTS) held on 2 March 2018, concerns were reiterated about cybersecurity measures by China (raised by Japan and the United States50 and supported by the European Union, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and Chinese Taipei). Concerns were also raised about measures by China on the use of virtual private networks and

leased lines (raised by the United States51 and supported by Japan).52

3.88. The above Section shows that a greater number of trade concerns were raised in the various WTO bodies where meetings took place between mid-October 2017 and mid-May 2018 compared to the same period in 2016-17. A larger number of trade concerns on measures

implemented by WTO Members were raised in nearly all Committees and Councils. Several trade concerns were raised in successive meetings of the same WTO body, suggesting more profound or

persistent problems. Continuing a trend observed previously, several trade concerns were raised in

48 Documents G/SG/M/50 and G/SG/M/51. 49 Minutes G/STR/M/32. 50 Communication by the United States titled "Measures adopted and under development by China

relating to its Cybersecurity Law" (document S/C/W/376). 51 Communication by the United States titled "Measures adopted and under development by China

relating to its Cybersecurity Law" (document S/C/W/376). 52 Document S/C/M/134.

- 53 -

more than one WTO body during this period, suggesting that these concerns involve increasingly complex and cross-cutting issues. It may also provide an indication that WTO Members are soliciting multiple platforms within the WTO committee structure to address various aspects of such trade concerns. From a systemic point of view, this is significant because of the increased transparency which it brings, but also because it demonstrates that Members are actively using the WTO committees to constructively engage trading partners on potential areas of trade friction.

Finally, the period under review also saw a number of trade concerns raised in successive General Council meetings suggesting more of a political than technical focus.

3.6 Policy Developments in Agriculture

3.89. During the 17-18 October 2017 and 20 February 2018 meetings of the Committee on Agriculture (CoA), 20 out of 26 implementation-related issues (Art. 18.6) were raised concerning policies implemented by G20 members.53 Chart 3.11 shows an increasing trend since 2011 in the

average number of questions raised per meeting under Article 18.6 concerning policies maintained by G20 economies. This trend has continued in 2017, with an average of 31 implementation-related questions posed to G20 members per meeting. Equally, in the first

meeting of 2018 (February), 31 questions were also posed under Article 18.6 concerning policies of G20 economies. These numbers include questions that were repeated from one meeting to the next because responses were not provided within the relevant timeframes.

Chart 3.11 Average number of questions posed to G20 members under Article 18.6a

a 2018 data covers the February 2018 CoA meeting.


3.90. Some of the issues raised were discussed for the first time, whereas others had been discussed one or more times in previous years. Table 3.23 indicates the specific measures relating

53 Questions and responses to the issues raised under the review process in the CoA meetings on

17-18 October 2017 and 20 February 2018 are available in G/AG/W/170 issued on 12 December 2017 and G/AG/W/173 issued on 6 April 2018.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


Chart Agri.1

Average number of questions posed to G20 members under Article 18.6a


- 54 -

to implementation commitments that were discussed for the first time during the October 2017 and February 2018 CoA meeting.54

3.91. Out of the 20 implementation-related issues concerning policies implemented by G20 members, 11 were discussed for the first time during the October 2017 and February 2018 CoA meetings. Four of the new issues related to domestic support policies benefiting producers of cereal, cotton and dairy products such as Canada's new dairy sector programme, EU intervention

stocks of milk powder, India's minimum support prices and U.S. support to the cotton sector. Another set of four issues sought clarification on policies that potentially subsidized exports of cereals, dairy products and pork meat such as the questions raised on Argentina's export subsidies to pork meat and its Reintegros programme, the Russian Federation's railway subsidies and U.S. dairy policies. Members also raised two new issues in relation to measures that restricted, or had the potential to restrict, trade of agricultural products (i.e. India's quantitative restrictions and

Indonesia's imports of soybean).

Table 3.23 Article 18.6 new issues

Question Summary

Question raised by Products Number of questions

CoA meetings

ID number

Russian Federation's railway subsidy for exports

Australia, Canada, European Union, Ukraine, United States

Cereals, wheat, corn, rice, malt, coarse grains

5 85, 86 86010, 86068, 86067, 86038, 86047, 85036

India's minimum support prices

Australia, Canada, European Union

Cereals, wheat, corn, rice, malt, coarse grains

3 86 86005, 86074, 86066

India's quantitative restrictions

Australia, United States

Fresh vegetables 3 85, 86 86006, 86037, 85060

EU intervention stocks of skim milk power

Australia, Canada, New Zealand

Milk powders 2 85, 86 86003, 86032, 85059

U.S. dairy policies Canada Dairy, milk, milk powders, butter, cheese, other

2 85, 86 86084, 85079

Argentina's export subsidies to pork meat

European Union Swine 1 86 86064

Indonesia's

soyabean imports

United States 1 86 86048

U.S. support to the cotton sector

European Union Cotton 1 86 86069

Argentina's Reintegros programme

European Union 1 85 85034

Canada's new programmes on dairy sector

New Zealand Dairy, milk, milk powders, butter, cheese, other

1 85 85010

Indonesia's new regulation on milk

United States Dairy, milk, milk powders, butter, cheese, other

1 85 85013


54 The complete questions and answers can be accessed through the Agriculture Information

Management System at http://agims.wto.org by using the ID numbers (Table 3.23) in the function "Search Q&A Submitted Since 1995".

http://agims.wto.org/

- 55 -

3.92. Other measures that were discussed, related to follow-up questions on persistent areas of concern which have been raised in the CoA multiple times (Table 3.24). One case has been raised in 20 CoA meetings (i.e. Brazil's domestic support programmes) while Canada's new milk ingredient class, its wine sale policy and its TRQ for cheese received a total of 39, 18 and nine questions, respectively, with a number of these questions being co-sponsored by two or three WTO Members. India's pulse policies has been discussed in three CoA meetings, generating in total

nine questions, six of which were raised at the 86th CoA meeting. Other recurrent issues included the Republic of Korea's rice imports, Indonesia's dairy import system, Turkey's IPR programme and Brazil tax credit programmes.

Table 3.24 Questions previously raised under Article 18.6

Question Summary

Question raised by

Products Number of questions

Number of CoA

meetings in which

the issue was

discussed

CoA meetings

ID number

Canada's New Milk Ingredient Class

Australia, India, New Zealand, United States

Dairy, milk, milk powders, butter, cheese, other

39 8 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86

86002, 86030, 86033, 85002, 85003, 85004, 85005, 85006, 85008, 85011, 85051, 85052, 85053, 85054, 85055, 85056, 84012, 84018, 84020, 84021, 84022, 84023, 84025, 84027, 84029, 84030, 84035, 84111, 84107, 84031, 83054, 83039, 82012, 82059, 82013, 82001, 81001, 81009, 81049, 81054, 81055, 81056, 80003, 80005, 80006, 80025, 79035

Brazil's domestic support programmes

United States, Ukraine

Wheat, corn, rice, malt, coarse grains, cotton

20 20 65, 66, 68, 69, 70,71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 83, 84, 85, 86

86031, 85049, 84073, 83038, 81008, 80024, 79001, 78002, 77066, 76039, 75023, 74021, 73026, 72051, 71028, 70007, 69027, 68007, 66002, 65011

Canada's wine sale policy

Australia, European Union, New Zealand, United States

Alcoholic 18 8 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86

86034, 85012, 85057, 84017, 84106, 84033, 84112, 84105, 83007, 83041, 83104, 83135, 82057, 82002, 81003, 81011,

81024, 81046, 81047, 81097, 80008, 80009, 80094, 80095, 79003

- 56 -

Question Summary

Question raised by

Products Number of questions

Number of CoA

meetings in which the issue

was discussed

CoA meetings

ID number

Canada's tariff-rate quota for cheese, and domestic support

New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, United States

Cheese 9 8 75, 76, 77, 80, 81, 83, 84, 85

85009, 84110, 84108, 83003, 83004, 83005, 81004, 81051, 81052, 80001, 80002, 80007, 77037, 77001, 76023, 75026

India's pulses policies

Australia, Canada, Russian Federation, Ukraine

Processed vegetables

9 3 84, 85, 86 86004, 86061, 86062, 86063, 86065, 86039, 86035, 85064, 84044

Republic of Korea's rice imports

Australia, Thailand, United States

Rice 4 3 23, 78, 86 86036, 23006, 78020, 78024

Indonesia's dairy import system

United States Dairy, milk, milk powders, butter,

cheese, other

2 2 84, 86 86046, 84075

Turkey's IPR programme

Russian Federation

Wheat 2 2 84, 86 86029, 84113

Brazil's tax credit programmes (Reintegra programme)

European Union

1 2 75, 85 85035, 75002


3.93. Regarding the review of notifications, timely and complete notifications are fundamental for

effective monitoring of the implementation of commitments. Twelve distinct notification requirements are applicable in agriculture covering the following areas: market access, domestic support, export subsidies, export prohibitions or restrictions and the follow-up to the Marrakesh NFIDC Decision. The applicability of a notification requirement to a Member is largely dependent

on its specific commitments under the AoA. Out of the 12 notification requirements the following five are "regular" or "annual" notification requirements: (i) imports under tariff and other quotas (MA:2); (ii) special safeguards (MA:5); (iii) domestic support (DS:1); (iv) export subsidies (ES:1); and (v) total exports (ES:2). Annual notifications are required to be submitted no later than a certain number of days following the end of the year in question, in accordance with the deadlines set out in document G/AG/2.

3.94. G20 economies have shown a high level of compliance with their transparency obligations under the AoA submitting 89% of their expected 1,308 notifications for the period 1995-2016 (Table 3.25). All expected notifications regarding 1995 to 2000 have been submitted (Chart 3.12). Furthermore, as seen in Chart 3.13, in recent years G20 economies have frequently submitted notifications that cover more than one implementation year which indicates an effort to bring their notifications up-to-date.

- 57 -

Table 3.25 Compliance by G20 members with annual notifications

Member Average compliance (%) Annual notification

requirements (MA:2, MA:5, DS:1, ES:1 and ES:2)

Brazil 100 4

Mexico 99 5

European Union 98 5

Australia 97 5

Japan 97 4

Canada 95 5

United States 95 5

Russian Federation 93 3

South Africa 92 5

Argentina 91 3

Korea, Republic of 90 4

Indonesia 85 5

China 80 3

India 71 3

Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of 59 2

Turkey 24 3


Chart 3.12 Total outstanding notifications per type of notification requirement per year (1995-2015)

Note: All notifications relative to the period 1995-2000 have been submitted.

MA:2 - Imports under tariff and other quotas, MA:5 - Special safeguards, DS:1 - Domestic support, ES:1 - Export subsidies, ES:2 - Total exports.


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

MA:2 MA:5 DS:1 ES:1 ES:2

Chart Agri.2

Total outstanding notifications per type of notification requirement per year, 1995-

2016

Source: WTO secretariat

MA:2 - Imports under tariff and other quotas, MA:5 - Special safeguards, DS:1 - domestic support, ES:1 - Export subsidies, ES:2

- Total exports.

Note: All notifications relative to te period 1995-2000 have been submitted.

- 58 -

Chart 3.13 Number of years reported in regular notifications by G20 members (1995-2018a)

a Until 1 May 2018.

Note: For example, in 2009 the G20 economies submitted 44 notifications covering 127 years. For example, a G20 economy may submit one notification reporting in-quota imports for eight years (2000-07). For the purpose of this table, this means that the G20 economy therefore reported eight implementation years.


Chart 3.14 Questions raised on G20 individual notifications per section per year (1995-2018a)



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Number of regular notifications

Total number of years reported

Chart Agri.3

Number of years reported in regular notifications by G20 members (1995-2018a)


a Until 1 May 2018.

Note: For example,in 2009 the G20 economies submitted 44 notifications covering 127 years. Mexico, for instance, submitted one Table MA:2 notification reporting in-quota imports for eight years (2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007). For teh purpose of this chart, this means that Mexico reported eight implementation years.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

NFIDC Decision Domestic Support Market Access Export restrictions Export competition


Chart Agri.4

Questions raised on G20 individual notifications per section per year, 1995-2018a


Num

ber

of questions

- 59 -

3.95. From 11 October 2017 to 30 April 2018, G20 economies submitted 35 notifications (including addenda and corrigenda). A total of 72 questions were posed during the October 2017 and February 2018 CoA meetings concerning these and previously submitted notifications. These questions accounted for half of all notification-related questions raised in the CoA in that period. During the review period the vast majority of questions concerned notifications related to domestic support which follows the trend observed over the past few years (Chart 3.14).

3.96. The following box on agricultural transfers has been provided by the OECD.

Box 3.4 Almost two-thirds of the US$0.5 trillion transferred annually to farmers comes in distorting, inefficient forms

In 2015-17, agricultural policies in 51 OECD and key emerging economies transferred US$484 billion a year on average directly to farmers. Put differently: more than 15 cents in every dollar received by farmers ("gross farm receipts") originates in some form of public support. Of these transfers, on average, 64% was provided via highly trade- and production-distorting measures – namely, market price support, and payments based on output or on unconstrained variable input use. An additional US$86 billion a year was spent on general support to the sector. The OECD's Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation 2018 report looks at how this support is provided, assesses its possible effects and suggests ways forward.

Compared with the mid-1990s, the level of producer support has fallen in most countries covered by the report (Figure 1). Just as importantly, the nature of this producer support is changing, with reductions in the share provided via highly trade- and production-distorting measures. In some large emerging economies, however, both the level of producer support and the share of most distorting support have increased. Overall, there are wide differences across countries: some countries – both OECD and emerging economies – have very low levels of support, while support levels in four OECD countries remain above 50% of gross farm receipts.

It is not just the level of support but how it is provided that matters. Many countries have reduced the trade impacts of their policies by more than the decline in their overall levels of support by shifting the type of support provided to less trade-distorting forms (Figure 2). In contrast, other countries have increased the share of their support given in the most distorting forms, so the trade impacts have increased by more than the increase in support would suggest.

Moreover, most agricultural policies in place today are not well-aligned with countries' goals for the sector: increasing productivity growth, enhancing the sector's environmental performance, improving resilience, and enabling farm households to improve their standard of living. As a priority, eliminating production- and trade-distorting support would allow farmers to benefit fully from market opportunities and discourage overuse of farm inputs. Importantly, it would also make scarce public funds available for more efficient and effective investments, including targeted support for improved environmental outcomes and other public goods. Agricultural support could also be better focused on key services for the sector where there is a net benefit to society, including investments in agricultural innovation systems, sectoral infrastructure, and biosecurity controls. Using freed-up resources for ensuring social protection for low-income households would address food insecurity more efficiently than farm support.

- 60 -

Figure 1. Level and composition of the Producer Support Estimate by country, 2015-17

Percentage of gross farm receipts

Source: OECD (2018), "Producer and Consumer Support Estimates", OECD Agriculture statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/agr-pcse-data-en. Note: the Producer Support Estimate measures support provided to agricultural producers, both in the form of direct payments and as a result of domestic policies affecting prices and through protection. It is expressed as a percentage of gross farm revenues.

Figure 2. Percentage point changes in % PSE and Trade Impact Index, 1995-97 to

2015-17

Selected economies

Source: OECD calculations based on PEM model results and OECD (2018), "Producer and Consumer Support Estimates", OECD Agriculture statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/agr-pcse-data-en. Notes: EU: EU15 for 1995-97, EU28 for 2015-17 Viet Nam and Philippines: 1995-97 replaced by 2000-02

Source: OECD. For more information: OECD (2018), Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation 2018, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/22217371

3.7 General Economic Support

3.97. For this Report, the number of G20 economies that provided information on general economic support measures was marginally higher than for the two previous reports. More than half of all G20 economies were requested to verify different general support measures or subsidy

programmes. The response rate to this request was disappointingly low and several of those G20 economies that did provide return answers insisted that a large number of these measures be taken out of the Report. This, in turn, reinforced the conclusion of previous reports that the universe of general economic support measures is much greater than what the monitoring exercise has managed to capture.

3.98. This Report identified and requested verification of over 40 general economic support or subsidy programmes in G20 economies covering a multitude of economic sectors ranging from

transport and agriculture to loan guarantees to SMEs. Many of these were multiyear programmes

with financial disbursements staggered over the lifetime of the project. Other measures were one-off grants or aid schemes. In monetary terms, programmes ranged from several hundred thousand U.S. dollars to in excess of US$19 billion.

3.99. More than half of these programmes were taken within the framework of one G20 economy which generally publishes detailed and transparent accounts of such measures and programmes.

However, taking into account the requests by several G20 economies for the deletion of such measures there was little base to create an annex for these types of policies which would provide a balanced and credible account of recent developments in the area of subsidies and general economic support. In the November 2016 Monitoring Report on G20 Trade Measures, the Secretariat provided a brief historical overview of trends in the area of general economic support

-20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15%

EuropeanUnion

Japan

Colombia

Viet Nam

Canada

UnitedStates

Philippines

China

Percentage points, relative to gross farm receipts

%TII change %PSE change

http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/agr-pcse-data-en

http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/agr-pcse-data-en

https://doi.org/10.1787/22217371

- 61 -

measures taken by G20 economies since 2008. This concluded that although the large economy-wide subsidies and high-profile bail-outs of the early years of the financial crisis are no longer prevalent across G20 economies, there was no evidence that G20 governments had turned their back on subsidization as a policy tool, particularly in certain strategic industries or sectors. At the same time it is imperative to recognize that despite the often significant financial cost of such programmes, not all general economic support measures have important trade-related effects and

determining their impact on trade flows might be a complex exercise.

3.100. The G20 economies may wish to reflect and provide further guidance on how this issue might be best addressed in future Reports, including if a more specific framework for reporting general economic support measures should be developed.

3.8 Other Selected Trade Policy Issues

3.101. The following Section provides a brief overview of other selected trade policy issues where

important developments took place during the review period, including follow-up to a number of issues which saw outcomes at MC11 in Buenos Aires.

Trade Facilitation

3.102. Implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) has continued after its entry into force on 22 February 2017. During the review period, 15 additional acceptance instruments were deposited, bringing total ratifications to 136 by mid-May 2018. Ratifications now encompass about 83% of the WTO's Membership and all G20 economies. Argentina, Indonesia and South Africa

notified their protocols of acceptance during the review period.

3.103. Members also advanced in the submission of notifications concerning the implementation of commitments under the TFA. In this sense, Members are required to indicate the provisions they would implement as of 22 February 2017 (Category A), those that they consider require additional time (Category B) and those which they consider require both additional time and capacity-building support (Category C). During the review period, South Africa presented notifications for categories B and C and, by mid-May 2018, the overall number of Members who

presented notifications had grown to 112 for category A, 62 for category B and 52 for category C. Other types of notifications required by the TFA have also received attention from Members. Fifty

delegations have presented several transparency notifications under Section I of the TFA (Articles 1:4, 10:4:3; 10:6:2 and 12:2:2). Thirteen donor Members submitted information on their assistance and capacity building support for developing and least-developed countries, and provided related data in line with Articles 22:1 and 22:2 of the TFA.

ITA Expansion

3.104. Under the ITA Expansion Agreement, import duties will be eliminated on 201 high‐tech

products whose annual trade is estimated at US$1.3 trillion, accounting for approximately 10% of world trade in goods. Negotiations were conducted by 2655 participants, representing 55 WTO Members56 and accounting for approximately 90% of world trade in these products. The ITA Expansion covers new generation IT products, including multi-component integrated circuits (MCOs), touch screens, GPS navigation equipment, portable interactive electronic education

devices, video game consoles, and medical equipment, such as magnetic resonance imaging products and ultra-sonic scanning equipment.

3.105. The second tariff cut57 was scheduled to take place by 1 July 2017, subject to the

completion of domestic procedural requirements. According to preliminary estimates by the WTO Secretariat, 95.4% of Participants' import duties of these products will be fully eliminated by 2019, with longer implementation periods (five or seven years) for a very limited number of sensitive products. The ITA Expansion Agreement is open to any other WTO Member wishing to join it. The

new tariff commitments will be recorded in each Participant's WTO schedule of concessions and applied on an MFN basis, which means that all 164 WTO Members will benefit from duty-free

55 On 3 November 2017, Georgia joined the ITA Expansion and became the 26th Participant. 56 The G20 members in the ITA Expansion Agreement are Australia; Canada; China; the European Union; France; Germany; Italy; Japan; Korea, Rep. of; the United Kingdom and the United States.

57 The first tariff cut took place on 1 July 2016.

- 62 -

market access for the covered products. G20 economies participating in the ITA Expansion have completed the procedures for modifying their WTO schedules, and the ITA Expansion concessions have become effective.

Government Procurement

3.106. At present, the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) has 19 parties, comprising 47 WTO Members. Another 31 WTO Members participate as observers in the Committee on

Government Procurement. Nine G20 economies (Canada, the European Union, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Kingdom and the United States) are formally covered by the GPA, while another nine (Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, the Russian Federation, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Turkey) are observers in the WTO Committee on Government Procurement. Currently, Australia, China and the Russian Federation are negotiating their accession to the Agreement as Parties.

3.107. Significant work continued in the Committee in relation to its agreed Work Programmes, which were adopted at the time of the conclusion of the renegotiation of the Agreement in 2012.

The Work Programmes are intended broadly to: (i) promote transparency with respect to Parties' implementation of the Agreement; (ii) facilitate, where relevant, improvements in the administration of the Agreement; and (iii) contribute, where appropriate, to preparations for future negotiations that are called for in the revised GPA. Activity focused, in particular, on the Work Programmes dealing with: (i) access to government procurement activities by SMEs; (ii) the

collection and reporting of statistical data; and (iii) the promotion of sustainability in Parties' procurement processes. The Committee is at, or close to, the stage of preparation of final reports regarding both the SME and the sustainability Work Programmes. The Secretariat further enhanced its e-GPA web portal to better service the information needs of GPA Parties, accession candidates and their suppliers.

Trade Finance

3.108. The global trade finance gap, as measured by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in 2017,

has remained high since 2013, at around US$1.5 trillion, or some 10% to 15% of the total value of trade finance markets. WTO Members are concerned by the fact that the gaps disproportionately affect developing countries and SMEs who, on average, see 60% of their requests for trade finance

rejected. According to the Global Enabling Trade Report by the World Economic Forum, lack of trade finance is among the top three obstacles to exporting for half of the countries in the world.

3.109. In the past year progress on trade finance has been recorded in several areas, thanks to

the joint action of partner institutions such as multilateral development banks (MDBs) and the International Chamber of Commerce. In 2017, total financing and guarantees provided by MDBs under trade finance facilitation programmes in developing countries reached approximately US$30 billion, up from around US$22 billion in 2016. With the recovery of global trade flows forecasted in 2018, demand for credit and guarantees facilities are likely to increase. However, representatives of MDBs have indicated that an important long-term solution to the trade finance challenge remains bringing the private sector back into the most challenging markets. One way

was to develop co-financing and co-risk sharing operational among MDBs where geographical coverage overlapped, and between MDBs and commercial banks. For example, the International Financial Corporation (IFC) and the Islamic Trade Finance Corporation (ITFC) recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding to conduct joint trade finance operations in Western Africa. The WTO will continue its advocacy and technical work in 2018 with the heads of multilateral agencies, the Financial Stability Board and other stakeholders.

- 63 -

3.110. Box 3.5 takes a closer look at effects of technology and trade on labour markets.

Box 3.5 Trade, technology and jobs

What are the effects of technology and trade on labour markets? Are all countries benefitting equally or are some being left behind by globalization and advances in technology? What are governments already doing and what else could they do to ensure that trade and technology are as inclusive as possible? Technology and trade – two of the most powerful drivers of global economic progress – can also raise economic adjustment challenges. Available evidence suggests that technological advances and trade have yielded important benefits for economies overall and do not have significant effects on aggregate labour market outcomes, but that they may sometimes adversely affect certain types of workers and/or regions. Helping workers adjust to changes in the labour market and ensuring that benefits are spread more widely can increase the positive impact of open trade and technological progress. While both forces can have similar effects on workers, empirical evidence attributes most of the disruptions of the labour market to technological change, including automation. In many countries, technological progress combined with an income elasticity of demand that is higher for services than for manufacturing products, and to a lesser extent trade, have contributed, and continue to contribute, to a decline in the share of manufacturing jobs as employment shifts toward the services sector (see Figure). All over the world, both forces contribute to an increase in the demand for skilled workers. Recent research also shows that the effects of trade on employment may vary significantly by region depending on exposure to import competition. These changes raise important adjustment challenges, as workers who lose their jobs in declining sectors and/or in exposed regions are not always well equipped and well placed to access newly created jobs.

Evolution of employment share by sector (1970 to 2012)

_______________ Source: Timmer, M. P., de Vries, G. J., & de Vries, K. (2015). Note: This figure covers 40 countries: 10 developed and 30 developing. The agriculture sector includes activities in agriculture, hunting, forestry and fishing. The industry sector includes mining and quarrying, manufacturing, construction and public utilities (electricity, gas and water).

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

1970

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Wo

rld

em

plo

ym

en

t sh

are (

%)

Agriculture Industry Services

- 64 -

Technological change does not only lead to the reallocation of workers between sectors, it also affects the relative earnings of workers with different skills, and the skill composition of employment. For the United States, it has recently been estimated that computerization is the central force driving changes in wage differentials between workers with different levels of education, accounting for 60% of the rise in the skill premium. With few exceptions, empirical literature confirms the idea that technological change is a major driver of the decline in routine occupations, and of the consequent employment polarization, in developed economies, while in the case of developing countries, the evidence that technological change is biased against routine employment is mixed. Like technological change, trade leads to a reallocation of economic activity and therefore induces changes in countries' employment structures at the level of tasks, occupations, firms or sectors. In advanced economies, trade increases the relative demand for highly-skilled workers, especially in non-routine occupations. Trade also raised the demand for skilled workers in some developing countries. The increased demand for skills often translates not only into an increased share of skilled workers in employment but also into a higher skill premium, that is, an increase in nominal wages of highly-skilled workers relative to low-skilled workers. Some experts argue that history will repeat itself, and that the next wave of technological advances will replace many existing jobs, creating new ones. Other experts disagree, arguing that the new wave of technologies is different (in terms of speed, scale and force) and will replace human jobs on a massive scale, leading to a "jobless future". Several studies and reports have attempted to estimate the share of jobs that are at high risk of automation. Different methodologies and underlying assumptions lead to substantially different estimated shares of jobs vulnerable to automation, where the largest estimates are up to four times larger than the smallest. Yet, independently of the methodology used, the estimated probability of automation is not equivalent to future unemployment and should therefore be interpreted with caution. In any case, people will need more creative and effective help to adjust to economic change, irrespective of its specific causes. Many Member countries are currently stepping up their efforts to ensure that no one is left behind by globalization and technological progress. Obstacles to the mobility of workers between jobs considerably raise the cost of adjustment. These obstacles can take various forms, such as the mismatch between the new skills demanded by an increasingly information-driven global economy and the older skill set of many workers. In that context, domestic policies and institutions play a key role in helping economies to make the most of economic change, by facilitating labour adjustment and sharing benefits more widely. Experience suggests that success in facilitating adjustment involves finding an appropriate balance between labour market flexibility, on the one hand, and employment security, on the other. Active labour market policies which help workers retrain and find new job openings, and assist them with relocation, can support people and encourage their transition into new opportunities.


Dispute Settlement

3.111. During the review period, 36 panel-, appellate- and arbitration proceedings were handled, on average, each month. Twelve dispute settlement reports, awards and decisions were circulated

during this period (Chart 3.15). Six of the circulated reports were issued by panels, and three were issued by compliance panels established under Article 21.5 of the DSU. The Appellate Body circulated two reports. In addition, Article 21.3(c) of the DSU arbitrators issued one decision regarding the reasonable period of time for implementation of DSB recommendations and rulings. By mid-May 2018, an additional 13 panel reports and eight appeals were pending, and four panel reports issued to parties were being translated for circulation to Members. Four Members have requested authorization to suspend concessions or other obligations in disputes where the

responding parties have failed to make their inconsistent measures consistent with their WTO obligations.

3.112. Although the dispute settlement system is under pressure at the moment, including as a

result of the ongoing impasse over the filling of the Appellate Body vacancies, Members continue to use it as a means of resolving their trade disputes. During the review period, WTO Members filed 13 requests for consultations concerning new disputes and two requests seeking compliance

proceedings. Four new panels and three Article 21.5 panels were established. In addition, three new panels were composed during the review period. As of mid-May 2018, seven established panels were in composition. While there are no longer any delays in a panel beginning its work, delays are being experienced at the appeal stage due to the high number of recently circulated panel reports which has resulted in an increased workload for the Appellate Body. By mid-May 2018, there were eight ongoing appeal proceedings, including in the compliance

- 65 -

proceedings in the EC and Certain Member States – Large Civil Aircraft (Article 21.5 – US) and US — Large Civil Aircraft (second complaint) (Article 21.5 – EU) disputes.

3.113. The subject matter of disputes brought to the WTO continues to span a wide range of agreements, including the GATT 1994, the AD Agreement, the SCM Agreement, the Safeguards Agreement, the SPS Agreement, the TBT Agreement, the GATS, the TRIPS Agreement and the Agreement on Agriculture. The first request for consultations citing the TFA has also been made.

Both developed and developing countries members continue to be active in the dispute settlement mechanism, both as complainants and as respondents.

Chart 3.15 Total number of active disputes per year (as at April 2018)a

a 2018 data are based on the average of the number of active disputes in January, February, March and April.

Note: Several disputes are counted as one if they deal with the same subject matter.


Fishery subsidies

3.114. At MC11, ministers adopted a Decision on the fisheries subsidies negotiations, with sustainable development considerations at its core. In particular, the Decision incorporates the main elements of SDG 14.6, including its deadline. It instructs Members to engage constructively in the fisheries subsidies negotiations, with a view to adopting, by the WTO's Ministerial Conference in 2019, comprehensive and effective disciplines that prohibit certain forms of fisheries

subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, and eliminate subsidies that contribute

to IUU fishing, recognizing that appropriate and effective special and differential treatment for developing country Members and LDC Members should be an integral part of these negotiations.

3.115. On the basis of this Decision, the Negotiating Group on Rules is engaged in an active programme of work structured around the main issue areas previously identified in the fisheries subsidies negotiations. The WTO is thus in position finally to deliver, at its next Ministerial Conference, on the sustainable trade and development promise of the fisheries subsidies

negotiations.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018a


Chart DS.1

Total number of active disputes per year (as at April 2018)a

a 2018 data are based on the average of the number of active disputes in January, February, March and April.

- 66 -

Electronic Commerce

3.116. Discussions on electronic commerce in the WTO gained momentum in 2016, and engagement remained very high in 2017 and 2018. In the many submissions received from Members, numerous ideas have been put forward on how the WTO should address e-commerce, given the changing nature of trade. The increased momentum and interest was reflected in the run-up to, and at, MC11, where ministers adopted a decision on the Work Programme on

Electronic Commerce. In that Decision, ministers agreed to continue and reinvigorate work under the Work Programme, and extended the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions until the next Ministerial Conference. In addition, on the margins of MC11, a diverse group of more than 70 WTO Members endorsed a Joint Statement on Electronic Commerce58, with the objective of exploring work towards future WTO negotiations on trade-related aspects of electronic commerce. Since MC11, work is ongoing under the auspices of the General Council and the relevant bodies, as

well as under the Joint Statement initiative, where participation is open to all WTO Members.

3.117. The Work Programme on Electronic commerce is based on a broad definition of "electronic commerce" that covers the production, distribution, marketing, sale or delivery of goods and

services by electronic means. The definition therefore includes the use of networks, such as the Internet, to search, purchase, advertise and sell goods and services online, as well as to supply services electronically across borders. For retail shopping, where statistics are more readily available, an estimated 1.66 billion people worldwide purchased merchandise online in 2017, with

global e-retail sales at US$2.3 trillion. This represented a 24.8% increase over 2016, and, by 2021, growth of up to US$4.48 trillion is anticipated. In Asia Pacific, online retail sales accounted for 12.1% of retail sales in 2016, but accounted only for 1.8% in the Middle East and Africa.59 Data on wholesale sales, and business-to-business e-commerce and online services are much harder to come by, but are conservatively estimated at 10 times the volume of retail e-commerce. More recently, sales over mobile devices have become a key factor. This so-called m-commerce reportedly accounted for 58.9% of digital sales of merchandise in 2017, and is expected to

represent 70% of the e-commerce traffic by the end of 2018.

3.118. As has been acknowledged in WTO discussions, connectivity is essential to participation in e-commerce and developing countries lag behind. Moreover, although nearly 54% of the world's households have access to Internet as of 2017, the figure is 15% for LDCs. However, the bar continues to rise as broadband Internet access, where the gap is greater, is now considered

essential. Nevertheless, mobile broadband shows promise, growing more than 20% annually. As of

2017, mobile broadband penetration in developed countries was four times higher than in LDCs, but the annual growth rate of subscriptions in LDCs is over 50% and prices in these markets are continuing a downward trend.60

3.119. At the same time, governments both developed and developing continue to take steps to enhance connectivity. Many are now including broadband Internet in universal service programmes, mandating minimum access speeds, and creating dedicated funds or incentive projects to promote broadband penetration. Some of the telecom/ICT measures listed in this

Report illustrate this trend. For example, to help reduce prices, the UK published regulations of wholesale, high-speed broadband services and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia introduced a technology neutral licensing regime so that licensees can provide a broader array of services.

3.120. Meanwhile, as on-line commerce becomes more widespread, governments are struggling to adapt their regulations and taking varied paths to do so. Examples cited in Section 4 include the entry into force of the new European data privacy regulation, a U.S. FCC ruling to reduce controls over Internet providers, reversing their classification as a regulated "common carrier"

service, South African measures to regulate online content, including videos, streaming and social media, the Russian Federation's rules on the registration of electronic messenger services and rules to prevent the use of virtual private networks (VPNs) to circumvent blocked content, Chinese measures enforcing mandatory licensing of VPNs, and an agreement, announced by the European Commission, on revised audiovisual rules covering broadcasters, video-on-demand and video sharing platforms.

58 WT/MIN(17)/60. 59 Statista.com, "E-commerce Worldwide", https://www.statista.com/topics/871/online-shopping/,

accessed April 2017. 60 “ICT Facts and Figures 2017”, ITU.

https://www.statista.com/topics/871/online-shopping/

- 67 -

Investment Facilitation

3.121. One outcome from MC11 was the Joint Ministerial Statement on Investment Facilitation for Development61 – co-sponsored by 70 WTO Members – which calls for launching "structured discussions with the aim of developing a multilateral framework on Investment Facilitation". A significant feature of the initiative is its focus on "facilitating" investment, rather than "protecting" it – the traditional concern of international investment regimes. In the same way that the WTO is

helping to facilitate global trade – with the 2017 TFA – co-sponsoring Members argue that the WTO could also help to facilitate global investment. Another significant feature of the initiative is that some developing countries were the initial proponents, although key developed economies have now joined as well. The co-sponsors of the Joint Ministerial Statement account for over 74% of world trade, 66% of inward FDI, and 61% of global GDP, and include Members from all major regions and all levels of development. The third, and perhaps most significant, feature of the

initiative is that it is being driven by a group of like-minded Members – not by the full WTO membership - but their explicit goal remains reaching a non-discriminatory, multilateral outcome.

Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises (MSMEs)

3.122. At MC11, 88 WTO Members - the Friends of MSMEs- issued a Joint Ministerial Statement62 establishing an Informal Working Group to look into how challenges faced by MSMEs could be addressed in a cohesive way within the WTO context. The Friends of MSMEs, led by a nine-Member Coordinating Committee63, have since then developed a road map of thematic sessions to be held

over the course of 2018. The first event took place on 27 March and focused on Access to Information for MSMEs and on how to operationalize the Global Trade Helpdesk. Forthcoming sessions will cover: access to trade finance; reduction of trade costs; how technical assistance and capacity building initiatives could better take into account the trade needs and challenges of MSMEs; and access to global markets - the Internet as a tool to address challenges for MSMEs in their efforts to reach global markets. These sessions, of an exploratory nature, aim at identifying a set of concrete, horizontal and non-discriminatory measures that Members could take in order to

strengthen MSME participation in global trade.

Women's Economic Empowerment

3.123. Supporting the participation of women in international trade is a key component of the

inclusive trade solutions that many governments are now adopting. The Buenos Aires Declaration on Trade and Women's Economic Empowerment64, signed by 122 WTO Members and Observers, seeks to ensure that the WTO works to make trade more inclusive and increases the participation

of women in trade. To date, the Declaration's signatories represent 75% of world trade. Signatories have specifically agreed to explore and find ways to best tackle barriers to trade faced by women; to better understand the links between trade and women's empowerment through dedicated events, discussions and exchange of information; and to collect relevant economic data.

3.124. Many Members have developed national strategies and development programmes including gender equality goals and women's empowerment priorities. One major objective is to increase women's participation in the workforce. Particular attention is being paid to empowering women in

areas such as finance, agriculture government procurement, tourism and construction. In particular, a diverse range of support programmes are being reported. These include training and technical assistance (finance literacy, vocational training, competing in international markets); accessing credits, loans and guarantees for small businesses (rural producers and innovative companies); and strengthening the development of MSMEs. In agriculture, some domestic support is targeted at women (mostly supporting training activities) with the objective of increasing

productivity and production. Some Members have government procurement schemes giving

preferences to companies with gender equality policies or to women-led SMEs.

3.125. Box 3.6 on digital technologies as a tool for gender-inclusive trade has been contributed by the ITC.

61 WT/MIN(17)/59. 62 WT/MIN17/58/Rev.1. 63 Bahrain, Kingdom of; Côte d'Ivoire; El Salvador; Hong-Kong, China; Nigeria; Pakistan; the

Philippines; Switzerland and Uruguay (general coordinator). 64 Viewed at https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc11_e/genderdeclarationmc11_e.pdf.

https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc11_e/genderdeclarationmc11_e.pdf

- 68 -

Box 3.6 Digital technologies as a tool for gender-inclusive trade

Women represent a great untapped resource in governments' economic and development arsenals. Women's labour force participation continues to lag behind that of men. Firms are much more likely to be owned or managed by men. Yet, income earned by women is more likely to be invested in children's education, health and nutrition.1 Enabling women to generate higher incomes would therefore contribute to communities' long-term well-being. It has been estimated that raising female labour force participation and entrepreneurship to male levels could raise GDP by 15% to 27%, depending on the region.2 Women also continue to be under-represented in international trade with only one of every five exporting companies being led by a woman.3 Legal, cultural, financial and digital barriers continue to prevent women from fully contributing to their economies. Acknowledging this reality, the 2017 Buenos Aires Declaration on Women and Trade calls for more action towards identifying and removing barriers to women's economic empowerment and increasing their participation in international trade. A series of recent data-gathering exercises by the ITC have shed light on barriers that continue to prevent women from reaching their full potential as equal economic actors. ITC business surveys on non-tariff measures (NTMs) show that female-owned export companies report procedural obstacles to trade more frequently than their male-owned counterparts. In particular, female-owned micro firms report a higher share of procedural obstacles due to "informal or high payments" and "discriminatory behaviour" than male-owned micro firms. Since micro firms are often one-person enterprises, it is plausible that women owner-managers are also responsible for trade-related administrative processes, leaving them more exposed to potential discrimination by officials.4 The digitalisation of export procedures could help overcome gender discrimination by reducing face-to-face interaction to obtain export-related documentation.

- 69 -

Share of procedural obstacles at home and abroad, by gender

_______________ Note: The box plot shows the distribution of the share of burdensome procedural obstacles in terms of quartiles at home and by the partner country. A transaction is a firm−product−partner combination.

Source: SME Competitiveness Outlook 2016

However, women are 6% less likely to have Internet access5, which hampers access to digital tools. It is also the case that female entrepreneurs are under-represented in the ICT sector, where they account for only 18% of businesses (compared to 30% in the clothing sector).6 There is nevertheless increased evidence that women successfully use digital tools when they are available. For example, ITC data shows that about 80% of women-led services companies surveyed in Sri Lanka, Kenya and Indonesia engage in social media advertising, while less than half use traditional advertising.7 Digital solutions have contributed to bringing down barriers to female entrepreneurship in a number of areas. For instance, the use of mobile money solutions has, in some countries, represented a means for women to overcome their traditionally limited access to banking services.8 By becoming early adopters of more efficient new payment procedures, women keep records of all transactions, which makes it easier to obtain loans. A recent ITC e-commerce survey found that female-owned firms are significantly more active in e-commerce than in traditional trade: among exporters conducting e-commerce alone, women entrepreneurs accounted for a share twice as high as for firms conducting only traditional off-line trade.9

Notwithstanding a gender gap when it comes to access to ICT, digital technologies hold the promise to unleash women's potential in business development and trade. Policy makers can contribute to making it happen by boosting digital solutions for business transactions - including through the implementation of the TFA - and promoting STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education for girls and women. _______________

1 Morrison, A.; Raju, D.; Sinha, N. (2007). Gender Equality, Poverty and Economic Growth. Policy Research Working Paper; No. 4349. World Bank, Washington, DC.

2 McKinsey Global Institute (2015). The power of parity, Cuberes D. & Teigner M. (2012), Gender gaps in the labor market and aggregate productivity, Sheffield Economic Research Paper Series, SERP Number: 2012017.

3 Davies, R. B., and Mazhikeyev, A. (2015). The glass border: gender and exporting in developing countries ,UCD Centre for Economic Research Working Paper Series, N.2015&25, University College Dublin, School of Economics; ITC business surveys on NTMs, 2010-2017, www.ntmsurvey.org.

4 ITC (2016) Meeting the standard for trade, SME Competitiveness Outlook. 5 International Telecommunication Union (2016), ICT facts and figures. 6 ITC business surveys on NTMs, 2010-2017, www.ntmsurvey.org 7 ITC (2017) Promoting SME competitiveness in Kenya and ITC (2017), Promoting SME competitiveness

in Indonesia, and ITC (2018) Promoting SME competitiveness in Sri Lanka. 8 ITC (2017) Closing the small-business and gender gap to make trade more inclusive in: OECD & WTO,

Aid for Trade at a glance 2017, Promoting Trade, Inclusiveness and Connectivity for Sustainable Development 9 ITC (2017). New Pathways to E-commerce: A Global MSME Competitiveness Survey. ITC. Geneva

http://www.intracen.org/publication/New-Pathways-to-E-commerce/

Source: ITC.

http://www.intracen.org/publication/New-Pathways-to-E-commerce/

- 70 -

3.126. The following box on a multidimensional approach to trade policy indicators has been contributed by the IMF:

Box 3.7 A Multidimensional approach to trade policy indicators

Recent events have underscored the importance of trade and trade policy to the global economy. A move towards inward looking policies can risk undermining the economic recovery underway. More broadly, addressing trade distortions can also raise productivity and growth, and a generalized move to more open trade that reduces foreign barriers can facilitate adjustment in countries facing greater import competition (see IMF-WTO-WB, 2017). Trade policy discussions stand to benefit from having a strong factual basis covering the multiple dimensions that are nowadays relevant to assess trade policy. To this end, this Box describes and discusses a set of indicators of trade regimes which can be a helpful tool to guide policy discussions (see Cerdeiro and Nam, 2018).

Barriers to trade can take many different forms, ranging from import tariffs, to regulatory barriers, to restrictions on services trade, to controls on foreign investment. Because of this diversity, no single indicator can provide a complete characterization of a country's trade regime. The indicators relate to three different areas of trade policy – trade in goods, trade in services, and FDI. It is worth stressing that none of the indicators described aims to benchmark countries' performance against commitments they may have, either under the WTO or vis-à-vis any other forum or agreement.

Figure 1 illustrates the results for the G20 as well as its advanced country and emerging market (EM) members. On the left-hand-side panel of the Figure, four of the indicators aim to measure barriers to goods trade: average tariffs, the fraction of imports covered by non-automatic licensing procedures, an index on trade facilitation, and the level of agricultural support. In addition, there are two indicators measuring restrictions to services trade, and two indicators that aim to capture barriers to FDI. All indicators are normalized such that being closer to the edge of the chart should be read as being more open.1

There are at least two salient features in the chart. First, on average G20 advanced economies (AE) appear to have more open trade regimes than their emerging-market counterparts, with the exception of agricultural support, which remains relatively large in some advanced economies. We should not necessarily expect emerging-market countries to be as open as AEs, which began to open to trade much earlier, and it is worth noting that EMs have liberalized faster over the last two decades, particularly from the mid-1990s to the mid-2000s, after which liberalization slowed across all countries. Second, the gap between AEs and emerging-market economies is particularly pronounced for one of the services trade measures and trade facilitation. This lends partial support to the view that liberalization efforts have been somewhat asymmetric not just across countries, but also across sectors.

In light of concerns that the period since the 2008 financial crisis has seen an increase in different forms of protectionism despite pledges to avoid this outcome, we also present indicators that reflect the evolution of a more granular set of trade policies since 2008. While there is considerable heterogeneity within groups of countries, overall, however, emerging-market G20 members appear to have adopted more trade-restricting measures since the 2008 financial crisis (Figure 1, right-hand-side panel).

_______________ 1 Since the different indicators are not expressed in comparable units of measure, we normalize every indicator with respect to a reference set of countries (G20 members in this Box), where 0 corresponds to the country that is least open and 1 to the country that is most open for that indicator. It is important to bear in mind that the comparability across different policy dimensions that this normalization allows is only in a distance-to-frontier sense.

- 71 -

Figure 1. Selected Trade Policy Indicators–Example with G20 Member Countries

All countries, however, including AEs, remain relatively far from free trade. Figure 2 shows the resulting indicators of countries' trade regimes if the edge of the chart represents free trade, rather than the most open country within the G20. The distance from free trade is largest for services restrictions, investment restrictions, trade facilitation, and, interestingly, in further MFN tariff reductions.

Because of the limitations inherent in any summary indicator, and given the lack of quantitative information for some important policy areas, these indicators are best used in conjunction with qualitative sources, including WTO Trade Policy Reviews. Information about countries' specific context is also essential for discussions about the scope, sequencing and pace of trade reforms (see e.g. IMF, 2010). It would also be useful to quantify the other aspects of countries' trade regimes – including in areas such as behind-the-border regulations that can

hinder trade, state support (subsidies, SOEs), government procurement, and intellectual property. Better data, both across countries and in terms of policy areas that significantly affect trade, would encourage better-informed policy discussions. _______________

Figure 2. Free-Trade Normalization

References

Cerdeiro, D. A. and Nam, R.J. 2018. "A Multidimensional Approach to Trade Policy Indicators," IMF Working Paper 18/32. International Monetary Fund (IMF). 2010. "Reference Note on Trade Policy, Preferential Trade Agreements, and WTO Consistency," September 2010, Washington, DC. International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Trade Organization (WTO), World Bank (WB). 2017. "Making Trade an Engine of Growth for All - The Case for Trade and for Policies to Facilitate Adjustment", March 2017, Frankfurt, Germany.

Source: IMF.

1\ Import (export) coverage ratio, except for the case of FDI (number of measures).

(0 = least open country in G20; 1 = most open country in G20)

Notes: The indicators reflect no judgment as to WTO compliance of underlying measures, nor whether certain measures (such as trade defense) are an appropriate response to the actions of other countries. The "ease of

starting a business" indicator is based on perceptions as part of an established IFC survey process.

Sources: Tariff data are from the WTO, World Tariff Profiles; the import licensing measure is based on UNCTAD TRAINS and COMTRADE data; the average trade facilitation performance, agricultural support measure, Services

Trade Restrictiveness Index (STRI), and FDI Restrictiveness Index are from the OECD; WB STRI is from the World Bank; the post-GFC indicators are from Global Trade Alert.

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Non-automatic licensing[2010-2016]

OECD average trade facilitationperformance [2017]

Agricultural support: producersupport equivalent (OECD)

[2015-2016]

OECD Services TradeRestrictiveness Index [2017]

WB STRI for services exportsunder commercial presence

[2008-2011]

OECD FDI RegulatoryRestrictiveness Index [2016]

WB-IFC ease of starting a foreignbusiness [2008-2011]

Average applied MFN tariff[2015-2016]

[year of data in square brackets]

G20 Average G20 AE Average G20 EM Average

Goods

Services

FDI

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Import duties and taxation

Non-tariff importrestrictions

Trade defense

Export restrictions

Localization requirements

# of FDI measures

Trade Restrictive Measures Adopted since 2008 1\measures in effect as of end-January 2018


-

Overall Trade and Investment Policy Stance

Non-automatic l icensing [2010-2016]

OECD average trade facil itation performance [2017]

Agricultural support: producer support equivalent (OECD) [2015-2016]

Average applied MFN tariff [2015-2016]

OECD Services Trade Restrictiveness Index [2017]

WB STRI for services exports under commercial presence [2008-2011]

OECD FDI Regulatory Restrictiveness Index [2016]

WB-IFC ease of starting a foreign business [2008-2011]

Post-GFC Trade Restrictiveness Measures

Non-tariff import restrictions

Trade defense

Export restrictions

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Non-automatic licensing[2010-2016]

OECD average trade facilitationperformance [2017]

Agricultural support: producersupport equivalent (OECD)

[2015-2016]

OECD Services TradeRestrictiveness Index [2017]

WB STRI for services exportsunder commercial presence

[2008-2011]

OECD FDI RegulatoryRestrictiveness Index [2016]

WB-IFC ease of starting a foreignbusiness [2008-2011]

Average applied MFN tariff[2015-2016]

Alternative normalization: G20 most closed=0; Free trade=1


Goods

Services

FDI

- 72 -

4 POLICY DEVELOPMENTS IN TRADE IN SERVICES

4.1. This Section captures new measures affecting trade in services by G20 economies between mid-October 2017 and mid-May 2018.

4.2. The new measures introduced by G20 economies are either horizontal in nature and affect the supply of services through commercial presence (6 entries) or the movement of natural persons (4) in multiple service sectors, or relate more specifically to financial services (9),

telecommunication, ICT and audiovisual services (13), education services (1) and professional services. While the majority of the measures covered by this Report appear trade facilitating, a number of the new policies are trade restrictive. Annex 4 provides additional information on all of these measures.

Measures affecting supply through commercial presence

4.3. Various governments introduced changes to their investment policy that affect the supply through commercial presence (mode 3) across various sectors. Most of these new measures eased

ownership or other limits on foreign investment. For example, India modified its FDI policy and allowed FDI in single-brand retailing up to 100% under the automatic route. Previously FDI above 49% required government approval. Further, foreign airlines are allowed to invest up to 49% in Air India under the approval route, subject to certain conditions.

4.4. China took measures to facilitate implementation of reforms in the country's free trade zones.

Among the changes, wholly foreign-owned enterprises are allowed to operate entertainment venues, joint foreign-Chinese travel agencies may provide services for certain travel abroad, and foreign investors are permitted to establish wholly foreign-owned enterprises to undertake international shipping, international ship management and international marine cargo handling businesses. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's General Investment Authority extended the duration of foreign investment licenses from one to five years, while Argentina adopted a series of measures simplifying administrative procedures in order to encourage private investment.

4.5. In Italy, a new measure extends the Government's "golden powers", which allow the blocking and the imposition of conditions on takeovers by non-EU companies in high technology sectors in cases of threats to national security and public order. Sectors concerned now include critical or

sensitive infrastructure such as storage and management of data, as well as critical technology, including artificial intelligence.

Communication services

4.6. Several G20 economies introduced new measures in relation to the communication sector. The Government of the Russian Federation introduced new rules for owners of electronic messenger services. Owners have to register with the national regulator and are required to maintain certain information on local servers. In China, the use of unlicensed virtual private networks (VPNs) was banned as of 1 April 2018, pursuant to the Circular on Cleaning Up and Regulating the Internet Access Service Market. The Circular requires all VPN providers to be licensed by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT), and mandates pre-

approval for cross-border business operations intending to set up their own or leasing private leased circuits (PLCs), including VPNs. If approved, PLCs can only be used to handle internal official business and not to connect onshore and offshore data centres or business platforms to carry out telecom business operations.

4.7. The European Union's new General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) entered into force on 25 May 2018, strengthening the rights of data subjects and imposing new requirements on organizations that process personal data. In the United States, the Federal Communications

Commission repealed net neutrality rules previously put into place.

4.8. A number of policy changes related to audiovisual services. The Government of Italy adopted new measures regulating the audiovisual sector, including increased quotas for Italian and EU content. The overall quota for the broadcasting of EU works will increase from 50% to 53% in 2019, to 56% in 2020, and to 60% in 2021. For public broadcasters, at least half of that quota has to be used for Italian works, and at least one third in the case of private broadcasters. The new

- 73 -

rules also set out the minimum number of Italian productions to be broadcast during prime time hours, and require additional investment by broadcasters in Italian works and independent European productions. In the European Union, agreement was reached between the European Commission, Parliament and Council on the main elements of revised audiovisual rules that will apply to broadcasters, video-on-demand and video-sharing platforms. The revisions include requirements that on-demand catalogues contain at least a 30% share of European content.

4.9. In Turkey, a new measure requires media service suppliers to obtain a broadcasting licence and platform operators to receive an authorization from Turkey's Radio and Television Supreme Council in order to provide radio, television and on-demand broadcasting services on the Internet. Lack of a valid licence can result in the removal of the content or blocking of access. For its part, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia approved licensing regulations for cinemas, lifting the long-standing prohibition on this activity.

Financial services

4.10. Various policy changes took place during the review period in the financial services sector.

For instance, China lifted some limits on the operation of foreign-owned non-banking payment institutions. Foreign suppliers wishing to provide electronic payment services for domestic transactions and cross-border transactions must obtain a payment service licence and establish foreign-invested enterprises within China's territory. The foreign-invested payment institution shall be capable of independently completing the payment business within the territory of China. The

storage, processing and analysis of personal and financial information collected and generated by foreign investment payment agencies in China must be conducted within the territory. In order for the information to be transferred overseas, the supplier must comply with the laws and regulations of the relevant regulatory authorities, fulfil corresponding information confidentiality obligations and obtain the consent of the personal information subject.

4.11. China also removed a number of impediments to the operation of foreign-owned banks in its territory, for example allowing locally incorporated foreign-invested banks to establish or invest in

regulated banking financial institutions, and removing approval requirements and replacing them with reporting requirements for certain services provided by foreign-invested banks.

4.12. In India, the Reserve Bank issued a Directive requiring all payment system operators to

store data within the country. Operators are given a maximum of six months to comply with the requirement and to submit an audit report certifying compliance. In addition, the Reserve Bank announced that sub-targets for lending to small and marginal farmers and micro enterprises will

be applied to foreign banks of 20 branches or above. For example, the sub-target of 8% of Adjusted Net Bank Credit or Credit Equivalent Amount of Off-Balance Sheet Exposure, whichever is higher, will apply for lending to small and marginal farmers.

4.13. Indonesia adopted a measure requiring domestic retail debit and credit transactions to be processed through switching institutions located in Indonesia and licensed by the Bank of Indonesia. The measure also imposed a 20% foreign equity cap on firms that wish to obtain switching licenses to participate in the National Payment Gateway (NPG). Foreign firms that wish

to process transactions through the NPG must form partnership agreements with licensed NPG switch institutions and agree to transfer technology as part of these agreements. Indonesia also adopted a new measure requiring that insurance services for the maritime transport for exports of coal and crude palm oil, and imports of rice can only be supplied by national companies.

4.14. In South Africa, the new Insurance Act introduced regulations on activities of foreign-based

insurers. It prohibits such insurers and reinsurers from soliciting business in South Africa on a cross-border basis, except where foreign reinsurers conduct business through a branch established

in South Africa.

Other services sectors

4.15. A more limited number of policy changes over the review period touched on services sectors not mentioned above. With respect to education services, the President of Indonesia instructed his Cabinet to allow 100% foreign ownership in universities, and to permit foreign institutions to open campuses in the country. Regarding transport services, Indonesia adopted a new measure

- 74 -

requiring that Indonesian-flagged vessels be used for exports of coal and crude palm oil, and for imports of rice.

Services supplied through the movement of natural persons

4.16. Regarding measures affecting the supply of services through the movement of natural persons, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia introduced a prohibition on foreign workers in 12 additional sectors. In Brazil, the new Migration Law simplified procedures for the entry and residence of

foreigners, and reorganized Brazil's visa system into the following categories: visitor visas, temporary visas, and official, diplomatic and courtesy visas. In Australia, the Temporary Work (Skilled) Visa (subclass 457) was replaced by the new Temporary Skill Shortage Visa on 18 March 2018. The following box, on measures restricting services trade, has been contributed by the OECD.

Box 4.1 Increase in measures restricting services trade between 2014 and 2017

Services markets are subject to complex and ever-changing regulatory environments where new measures can lower trade barriers or bring about more stringent conditions for foreign suppliers. The OECD Services Trade Restrictiveness Index (STRI) collects information annually on the nature and extent of regulatory barriers affecting services trade in 44 countries across 22 services sectors. The periodical review of trade-relevant laws and regulations provides new insights into key changes and emerging global trends on services trade regulations.

Results from the 2017 STRI update show an increasingly tighter global regulatory environment for services trade in some sectors (Figure 1). Overall, the net effect of services' trade-restricting measures on the STRI scores has been larger than that of the trade-liberalizing measures between 2014 and 2017. These results are largely due to restrictive economy-wide policy changes being implemented in a number of countries. This was particularly the case for measures affecting services supplied through the temporary movement of natural persons (Mode 4), due to more stringent entry conditions being applied to persons seeking to provide services on a temporary basis, such as intra-corporate transferees, or contractual or independent services suppliers. In addition, some countries have tightened the screening process for foreign investments and others have introduced economy-wide limitations on cross-border data flows.

Recent OECD analysis reveals that the costs of services trade restrictions are high, creating significant obstacles for businesses both in services and manufacturing industries. For instance, in certain transport and logistics segments, average trade restrictions can raise prices by 20% for business users of services inputs.

Figure 1. Impact of policy changes on the STRI results, 2014-2017

Cumulative changes in results across countries

Source: STRI database (http://oe.cd/stri-db) Note: Regulatory changes have been recorded in the STRI database until October 2017. For more information: OECD (2018), OECD Services Trade Restrictiveness Index: Policy Trends Up To 2018, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://www.oecd.org/trade/services-trade/STRI-

Policy-trends-up-to-2018.pdf .

Source: OECD.

-1.2

-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Motio

n p

ictu

res

Tele

co

mm

un

ications

So

un

d r

eco

rdin

g

Com

pu

ter

se

rvic

es

Bro

adca

stin

g

Fre

igh

t fo

rward

ing

Carg

o-h

an

dlin

g

Cou

rier

se

rvic

es

Custo

m b

roke

rage

Sto

rag

e a

nd w

are

ho

usin

g

Rail

freig

ht

tra

nsp

ort

Air

tra

nsp

ort

Dis

trib

ution

se

rvic

es

Roa

d fre

ight

tra

nsp

ort

Mari

tim

e tra

nsp

ort

Insura

nce

Com

me

rcia

l ba

nkin

g

Acco

un

tin

g s

erv

ices

Le

ga

l se

rvic

es

En

gin

eeri

ng

serv

ices

Con

str

uctio

n

Arc

hite

ctu

re s

erv

ices

Digital network Transport and distribution supply chain Market bridging andsupporting services

Physicalinfrastructure

services

Cumulative trade liberalisations (2014 to 2017) Cumulative trade restrictions (2014 to 2017)

http://oe.cd/stri-db

http://www.oecd.org/trade/services-trade/STRI-Policy-trends-up-to-2018.pdf

http://www.oecd.org/trade/services-trade/STRI-Policy-trends-up-to-2018.pdf

- 75 -

5 POLICY DEVELOPMENTS IN TRADE AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

5.1. During the period under review, the relation between intellectual property (IP) and trade continued to develop and diversify, as some G20 economies established their own national strategies to streamline IP into the economy (Box 5.1) and continued to modernize and fine-tune their IP legislation (Box 5.2).

Box 5.1 National IP strategies

Canada1 In April 2018, Canada launched its IP Strategy to help entrepreneurs better understand and protect IP, and improve access to shared IP. Its objective is improving IP legislation, literacy and advice. It will also provide tools to support businesses to pursue their own IP strategies.

Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of2 As part of the National Transformation Program 2020, the Saudi Intellectual Property Authority was established. Its objective is to develop a national IP strategy and to follow up on its implementation. _______________

1 Viewed at http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/108.nsf/eng/h_00000.html. 2 Submission by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for the WTO Trade Monitoring Report.


Box 5.2 Domestic legislation

China1 China's Anti-unfair Competition Law entered into force in January 2018. Supporting regulations related to IP rights will be formulated, inter alia, on market confusion, infringement of business secrets and internet unfair competition. Special law enforcement actions and coordinated deployment and investigation will be undertaken to strengthen IP enforcement and fair competition. Mexico2 In March 2018, Mexico amended its Industrial Property Law by introducing a new specific regime for geographical indications, in addition to the one of denominations of origin; strengthening the right of inventors and designers to be named in patent/design applications; reducing the period of protection for industrial designs from 15 non-renewable years to five renewable years for a maximum of 25 years; regulating the

priority of inter-related patent applications; establishing a non-extendable period of one month for trademark opposition and increasing penal sanctions for trademark counterfeiting. Turkey3 In November 2017, Turley amended its Copyright Law to take account of digital developments, improve transparency of collecting societies, and address problems related to licensing.

_______________ 1 Submission by China for the WTO Trade Monitoring Report. 2 Submission by Mexico for the WTO Trade Monitoring Report and document WTO document IP/N/1/MEX/16,

29 March 2018. 3 Submission by Turkey for the WTO Trade Monitoring Report.


5.2. On the bilateral and regional fronts, G20 economies continued to implement and negotiate a

network of trade agreements that contain substantive IP provisions. Currently, 219 RTAs in force notified to the WTO contain IP provisions. Over time, conclusion and implementation of RTAs have further developed the interconnection between IP and trade in goods and services, and the links of the IP system to other normative areas, such as investment, e-commerce and competition.

Notable provisions on IP standards and work programmes were contained in agreements signed during the reporting period, including the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership1 and the African Continental Free Trade Area.2 Significant IP issues have

1 As seen in https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/free-trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements-

concluded-but-not-in-force/cptpp/cptpp-overview/ 2 As seen in https://au.int/en/pressreleases/20180321/au-member-countries-create-history-massively-

signing-afcfta-agreement-kigali; and Articles 6 to 8 as seen in https://www.tralac.org/documents/resources/african-union/1870-agreement-establishing-the-afcfta-kigali-draft-text-march-2018-1/file.html

http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/108.nsf/eng/h_00000.html

https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/free-trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements-concluded-but-not-in-force/cptpp/cptpp-overview/

https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/free-trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements-concluded-but-not-in-force/cptpp/cptpp-overview/

https://au.int/en/pressreleases/20180321/au-member-countries-create-history-massively-signing-afcfta-agreement-kigali

https://au.int/en/pressreleases/20180321/au-member-countries-create-history-massively-signing-afcfta-agreement-kigali

https://www.tralac.org/documents/resources/african-union/1870-agreement-establishing-the-afcfta-kigali-draft-text-march-2018-1/file.html

https://www.tralac.org/documents/resources/african-union/1870-agreement-establishing-the-afcfta-kigali-draft-text-march-2018-1/file.html

- 76 -

been reportedly under consideration during the re-negotiations of the NAFTA3 and the Association Agreement between Mexico and the European Union4, as well as in the continuing negotiations between MERCOSUR and the European Union.5

TRIPS Council

5.3. During the review period, the TRIPS Council met on two occasions on 19-20 October 2017 and on 27 February 2018.

5.4. At the October 2017 meeting, India posed questions6 to the European Union regarding Commission Notice on the Customs Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) concerning goods brought into the Customs Authority of the Union without being released for free circulation, including goods in transit.7 The objective of the Commission Notice is to update the EC Guidelines concerning the enforcement by EU customs authorities of IPRs with regard to goods, in particular medicines, in transit through the European Union by reflecting EC Regulation No. 1383/2003 and

the EU Trademark Package. In response, the European Union indicated that the Regulations were compliant with the TRIPS Agreement, particularly its enforcement provisions. It also indicated its

willingness to engage in bilateral talks with Members concerned.8

5.5. In October 2017, WTO Members also adopted the annual report on the functioning of the special compulsory licensing system under the TRIPS Amendment, and agreed on a two-year extension of the period for acceptance of the Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement until 31 December 2019. After several years of consideration, the TRIPS Council reached consensus on

granting observer status to the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO) and the African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI).

5.6. Discussions on non-violation and situation complaints under the TRIPS Agreement took place in the run-up to MC11. In December 2017, Ministers agreed to extend the moratorium until MC12. At the February 2018 meeting, Members reflected on how to move forward on the examination of the scope and modalities for non-violation and situation complaints. G20 economies actively participated in these discussions.

5.7. During the two meetings, G20 members played a key role in sharing experiences and engaged in constructive policy discussions on two ad hoc agenda items: (i) IP and innovation, and

(ii) IP and the Public Interest. Exchanges revolved around inclusive innovation and trade of MSMES9, the societal value of IP in the new economy10, compulsory licences11, and regulatory review exemption.12

5.8. Effective implementation of the TRIPS Agreement provisions on transparency remained a

central responsibility of the TRIPS Council. During the review period, four G20 members13 notified legislative measures under Article 63.2, including in the areas of copyright and related rights, trademarks, geographical indications, industrial designs, patents, trade secrets, plant variety protection, and enforcement.

3 As seen in https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2017/november/ustr-

releases-updated-nafta 4 As seen in http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/eu-mexico-trade-agreement/ 5 As seen in http://www.sice.oas.org/TPD/MER_EU/MER_EU_s.asp 6 These questions were a follow-up to the presentation provided by the European Union, in June 2016,

on the main features of its Trademark Package (Directive 2015/2436 and Regulation 2015/2424). 7 Document IP/C/W/636. 8 In 2009, the TRIPS Council had intensive discussions on the detention, on patent infringement

grounds, of generic drugs originating in India, transiting through ports in EU member States to third country destinations, pursuant to EC Regulation No. 1383/2003. India and Brazil alleged that the measures at issue were, in several respects, inconsistent as such and as applied, with the obligations of the European Union under the TRIPS Agreement, in particular Articles 28, 31, 41 and 42. In May 2010, India and Brazil requested consultations with the European Union on this issue (DS408 and DS409, respectively), which are still pending.

9 Document IP/C/W/635 and IP/C/W/638. 10 Document IP/C/W/641. 11 Document IP/C/W/630. 12 Document IP/C/W/639. 13 Australia, China, Mexico and United States.

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2017/november/ustr-releases-updated-nafta

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2017/november/ustr-releases-updated-nafta

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/eu-mexico-trade-agreement/

http://www.sice.oas.org/TPD/MER_EU/MER_EU_s.asp

- 77 -

TRIPS-Related Discussions in Trade Policy Reviews

5.9. G20 economies contributed actively to the discussions of the Trade Policy Reviews of 15 other WTO Members.14 These Reviews covered a wide range of IP issues with a bearing on trade policy, including exhaustion regimes and parallel imports, copyright registration, exceptions and limitations, folklore protection, collective management organizations, trademark pre-registration, well-known marks, geographical indications, patent exceptions and certificates of supplementary

protection, patentability criteria, protection of undisclosed information and test data, registration of industrial designs, enforcement, ex officio authority for boarder measures, application of border measures to goods in transit, acceptance of the Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement, absence of notifications to the TRIPS Council15, regional IP regimes16, accession to and ratification of WIPO treaties and the UPOV Convention, reduction of red-tape in the administration of IP rights, operation of an "IPR marketplace" and IP monetization roadmap, and IP education and outreach

programmes.

14 Members of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire,

Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal and Togo), the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Cambodia, The Gambia, Malaysia, Egypt, Philippines and Montenegro.

15 Question posed by the European Union to Guinea-Bissau, document RD/TPR/850 16 Namely the Andean Community and the OAPI.

- 78 -

ANNEX 1

MEASURES FACILITATING TRADE1

(MID-OCTOBER 2017 to MID-MAY 2018)

Confirmed information2

Measure Source/Date Status

Argentina Trade facilitation measure for importers through the implementation of the "Authorized Economic Operator" scheme

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Administración Federal de Ingresos Públicos - Resolución General No. 4150-E (26 October 2017)

Effective 28 October 2017

Trade facilitation measure for exporters through the implementation of the "Authorized Economic Operator" scheme

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Administración

Federal de Ingresos Públicos - Resolución General No. 4150-E (26 October 2017)


Elimination of the requirement for exporters to settle their foreign currency originating from export operations (all sectors)

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Decreto No. 893/2017 - Entidades Financieras (1 November 2017)

Effective 2 November 2017

Elimination of the sworn declaration requirement (Declaración Jurada de Ventas al Exterior "DJVE") for the export of certain products (with small export volume) (e.g. rye; oats; millet; worked oat grains; certain oil seeds (cartamo); linseed oils and its fractions; oil-cake and other solid residues, whether or not ground or in the form of pellets, resulting from the extraction of soyabean oil (tortas de soja y expellers de soja); certain oil-cake and other solid residues, resulting from the extraction of vegetable fats or oils (lino, nabo y colza) (NCM 1002; 1004; 1008; 1104; 1207; 1515; 2304; 2306)

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Resolución No. 364-E/2017 - Ministerio de Agroindustria (16 November 2017)


Elimination of "reference values" for exports of all goods Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Administración Federal de Ingresos Públicos - Resolución General No. 4161-E (23 November 2017)


1 The inclusion of any measure in this Annex implies no judgement by the WTO Secretariat on whether

or not such measure, or its intent, is protectionist in nature. Moreover, nothing in the Annex implies any judgement, either direct or indirect, on the consistency of any measure referred to with the provisions of any WTO agreement.

2 This Section includes information which has either been provided by the Member concerned or has been confirmed at the request of the Secretariat.

- 79 -


Temporary elimination of import tariffs on certain machinery, equipment and goods (NCM Chapters 39; 70; 72; 73; 74; 84; 85; 90) destined for the production of renewable energy (Régimen de Fomento de las Energías Renovables)

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Decreto No. 814/2017 (10 October 2017)

Effective 1 January 2018 for 60 months

Elimination of the Register Export Operation (Registro de Operaciones de Exportación - ROE-ROJO) for the export of certain live bovine animals, bovine meat and edible offal, certain products of animal origin, certain prepared or preserved meats, extracts and juices of meat, soups and broths, gelatine of animal origin (NCM 0102; 0201; 0202; 0206; 0210; 0504; 1602; 1603; 2104; 3503) requiring the recording of export operations (established in 2006)

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Resolución Conjunta General No. 4170-E/2017 - Ministerio de Agroindustria y Administración Federal de Ingresos Públicos (14 December 2017)

Effective 20 December 2017

Temporary reduction of import tariffs (to 2%) on static converters and (to 10%) on electrical motor vehicles for the transport of 10 or more persons (NCM 8504.40.10; 8702.40.90). Further reduction of the Mercosur Common Tariff depends on multiple variables, including local content thresholds

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Decreto No. 51/2018 (16 January 2018)

Effective 20 January 2018

Inclusion in the "Authorized Economic Operator" scheme of "in-factory customs regime" users (Plan Piloto Operador Económico Autorizado para Usuario del Régimen de Aduana en Factoría (RAF))

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Resolución General AFIP No. 4197-E (29 January 2018)


Australia Elimination of the "special duty" of $A 12,000 on imports of used passenger vehicles (the previous duty was 5% plus $A 12,000 and is now 5%)

Permanent Delegation of Australia to the WTO (25 May 2018)


Brazil Temporary elimination of import tariffs on certain vaccines for human medicine, under an import quota of 11 million doses (NCM 3002.20.27; 3002.20.29)

(effective 1 December 2017 to 30 November 2018); and on certain vaccines for human medicine (hepatite A), under an import quota of 2,250,000 doses (NCM 3002.20.29) (effective 2 April 2018 to 1 October 2018). Temporary reduction (to 2%) of import tariffs on certain polyesters, under an import quota of 850 tonnes (NCM 3907.99.99) (effective 18 October 2017 to 17 January 2018); and on jute (NCM 5303.10.10), under an import quota of 7,000 tonnes (effective 18 October 2017)

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO

(25 May 2018), Camex Resolution Nos. 84/2017 (17 October 2017) and 89/2017 (30 November 2017) and Secex Portaria Nos. 40/2017 (19 October 2017), 42/2017 and 43/2017 (1 December 2017)

Effective: see individual dates in measure

Temporary elimination of import tariffs on 1,105 capital goods tariff lines (NCM Chapters 84; 85; 86; 87; 89; 90; 94), and 3 informatics and telecommunications goods tariff lines (NCM 8517.62.39; 8543.70.99; 9032.89.81), through the "ex-out" regime (mechanism designed to temporarily reduce import tariffs on capital goods and informatics and telecommunications equipment not locally produced)

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO (25 May 2018), Camex Resolution Nos. 80/2017, 81/2017 (17 October 2017) and 90/2017 (13 December 2017)

Effective until 30 June 2019

- 80 -


Decrease of import tariffs (from 14% to 2%) on sensitized photographic plates and film in the flat for x-ray; and on certain polyesters, certain organic surface-active agents, and certain acrylic polymers in primary forms; (from 16% to 2%) on plastics of poly(vinyl butyral), on electrical fixed capacitors (i.e. single layer ceramic dielectric, multilayer ceramic dielectric, dielectric of paper or plastics, variable or adjustable (pre-set)), on other variable resistors, including rheostats and potentiometers, and on other apparatus for protecting electrical circuits, fixed resistors for a power handling capacity not exceeding 20 W (effective 1 January 2018); and on tantalum, multilayer ceramic dielectic and certain apparatus for switching or protecting electrical circuits (NCM 8532.21.20; 8532.24.20; 8536.90.60) (effective 2 March 2018); and (from 4% to 2%) on certain supported catalysts (effective 1 January 2018). Elimination of import tariffs (from 6%) on transistors, other than photosensitive transistors, with a dissipation rate of less than 1 W (NCM 3701.10.10; 3907.99.93; 3907.99.94; 3907.99.95; 3920.91.00; 3921.90.13; 8532.23.10; 8532.24.10; 8532.25.10; 8532.29.10; 8532.30.10; 8533.40.12; 8536.30.10; 8541.21.20; 3404.90.22; 3815.90.93; 3906.90.48; 8533.21.20)

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO (25 May 2018), Camex Resolution Nos. 54/2017 (5 July 2017) and 95/2017 (19 December 2017) and 11/2018 (28 February 2018)


Temporary reduction (to 2%) of import tariffs on certain poly(ethylene terephthalate) (NCM 3907.61.00), under an import quota of 10,000 tonnes (effective 30 December 2017 to 29 December 2018); on certain printing ink (NCM 3215.19.00), under an import quota of 600 tonnes (effective 30 December 2017 to 29 December 2018); on non-alloyed nickel (catodos) (NCM 7502.10.10), under an import quota of 1,350 tonnes (effective 4 January 2018 to 3 April 2018); on dimethylamine (NCM 2921.11.21), under an import quota of 12,000 tonnes (effective 23 January 2018 to 22 January 2019); on black printing ink (NCM 3215.11.00), under an import quota of 350 tonnes (effective 23 January 2018 to 22 January 2019); on non-roasted malt (NCM 1107.10.10), under an import quota of 156,531 tonnes (effective 22 December 2017 to 21 December 2018); on

polycarbonates (NCM 3907.40.90), under an import quota of 35,040 tonnes (effective 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2018); on certain compounded rubber, unvulcanized in primary forms or in plates, sheets or strip (NCM 4005.99.90), under an import quota of 1,300 tonnes (effective 2 January 2018 to 1 July 2018); on certain synthetic filament yarn (other than sewing thread), not for retail sale (NCM 5402.47.10), under an import quota of 2,200 tonnes (effective 2 January 2018 to 1 January 2019); and on certain boards, panels, consoles, desks, cabinets and other bases, equipped with two or more apparatus under heading HS 8535 or 8536, for electrical control or the distribution of electricity, including those incorporating instruments or apparatus under HS Chapter 90, and numerical control apparatus, other than switching apparatus under heading HS 8517 (NCM 8537.20.90), under an import quota of 31 units (effective 2 January 2018 to 1 January 2019). Temporary elimination of import tariffs on sardines (NCM 0303.53.00), under an import quota of 50,000 tonnes (effective 22 December 2017 to 21 June 2018); on p-xylene (NCM 2902.43.00), under an import quota of 180,000 tonnes (effective 22 December 2017 to 21 December 2018); and on certain vaccines for humans (dengue) (NCM 3002.20.29)

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO (25 May 2018), Camex Resolution Nos. 97/2017 (20 December 2017), 98/2017 (21 December 2017) and 99/2017 (29 December 2017), and Secex Portaria Nos. 48/2017, 49/2017, 50/2017, 51/2017 (22 December 2017) and 1/2018

(2 January 2018)


- 81 -


Elimination of import tariffs (from 8%) on certain medicines consisting of mixed or unmixed products for therapeutic or prophylactic uses, put up in measured doses (including those in the form of transdermal administration systems) or in forms or packings for retail sale (dicloridrato de daclatasvir and dasatinibe) (NCM 3004.90.69; 3004.90.79) (effective 1 February 2018), and on certain medicaments (idursulfase) (NCM 3003.90.24; 3004.90.14) (effective 1 February 2018); (from 14%) on certain parts for teleferics (NCM 8431.39.00) (effective 6 February 2018), and teleferics, chair-lifts, ski-draglines, and traction mechanisms for funiculars (NCM 8428.60.00) (effective 7 March 2018); (from 20%) on certain fairground amusement parts (NCM 9508.90.90) (effective 6 February 2018); and on certain industrial robots (NCM 8479.50.00) (effective 28 February 2018); (from 6%) on diodes, other than photosensitive or light emitting diodes (NCM 8541.10.22; 8541.10.29) (effective 28 February 2018); and on unwrought aluminium, non-alloyed (NCM 7601.10.00), under an import quota of 353,000 tonnes (effective until 30 June 2018)

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO (25 May 2018), Camex Resolution Nos. 1/2018 (15 January 2018), 4/2018 (5 February 2018), 9/2018 (28 February 2018), 11/2018 (28 February 2018) and 16/2018 (7 March 2018)


Temporary reduction (to 2%) of import tariffs on disodium sulphate, under an import quota of 910,000 tonnes (NCM 2833.11.10) (effective 31 January 2018 to 30 January 2019); on rectangular (including square) aluminium plates and sheets of aluminium alloys, under an import quota of 2,937 tonnes (NCM 7606.12.90) (effective 1 February 2018 to 31 January 2019); on aluminium foil, rolled but not further worked, under an import quota of 2,137 tonnes (NCM 7607.11.90) (effective 1 February 2018 to 31 January 2019); on viscose rayon staple fibres (NCM 5504.10.00), under an import quota of 40,000 tonnes (effective 28 March 2018 to 27 March 2019); on non alloyed nickel (catodos) (NCM 7502.10.10), under an import quota of 7,200 tonnes; on titanium oxides (NCM 2823.00.10), under an import quota of 8,000 tonnes; on palm kernel or babassu oil and fractions thereof (NCM 1513.29.10), under an import quota of 224,785 tonnes; and on certain electrical apparatus for switching or protecting

electrical circuits (NCM 8535.90.00), under an import quota of 500 units (effective 25 April 2018). Temporary elimination of import tariffs on certain pharmaceutical products (cloridrato de duloxetina, clavulanato de potássio) (NCM Chapters 3003.90.89), under an import quota of 48 tonnes (effective 3 May 2018, for 12 months)

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO (25 May 2018), Camex Resolution Nos. 3/2018 (30 January 2018), 17/2018 (27 March 2018), 27/2018 (24 April 2018) and 32/2018 (2 May 2018), and Secex Portaria Nos. 4/2018 (31 January 2018) and 15/2018 (28 March 2018)


Temporary elimination of import tariffs on 1,115 capital goods tariff lines, and 97 informatics and telecommunications goods tariff lines (NCM Chapters 84; 85; 89; 90), through the "ex-out" regime

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO (25 May 2018), and Camex Resolution Nos. 14/2018 and 15/2018 (28 February 2018), 22/2018 and 23/2018 (27 March 2018), and 30/2018 and 31/2018 (2 May 2018)

Effective until 31 December 2019

- 82 -


New legislation streamlining the medical device importation process

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO (25 May 2018) and Resolucão da Diretoria Colegiada - RDC No. 208 - Ministério de Saúde-MS, Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária - ANVISA (5 January 2018)


China

Imposition of interim tariffs resulting in the temporary reduction of import tariffs on certain fish and crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates (HS Chapter 03); on cheese and curd (HS Chapter 04); on certain edible fruit and nuts (HS Chapter 08); on sausages and similar products (HS 1601.00.10; 1601.00.20); on certain preparations of cereals, flour, starch or milk (HS 1901.10.90; 1902.19.00); on jams (HS 2007.10.00); on other food preparations (HS 2106.90.50; 2106.90.90); on certain beverages, spirits and vinegar (HS 2201.10.10; 2205.10.00; 2208.20.00; 2208.30.00); on medicaments (HS 3004); on certain essential oils and resinoids (HS Chapter 33); on certain articles of leather (HS Chapter 42); on certain articles of apparel and clothing accessories (HS Chapters 61 and 62); on blankets and travelling rugs (HS 6301.20.00); on certain footwear (HS Chapter 64); on certain nuclear reactors, boilers, and machinery (HS Chapter 84); on certain electrical machinery and equipment (HS Chapter 85); on baby carriages (HS 8715.00.00); on certain optical, photographic, cinematographic, measuring, checking, precision medical or surgical instruments (HS 9004.90.10; 9021.29.00); on certain toys, games

and sports requisites (HS 9506.11.00; 9506.12.00; 9506.19.00; 9506.70.10; 9506.70.20); and on certain miscellaneous manufactured articles (HS Chapter 96)

Permanent Delegation of China to the WTO (28 May 2018)

Effective December 2017

Reduction of import taxes (from 5% to 2%) on raw donkey skins (HS 4101.20.20)



India Elimination of export duties on electrodes of a kind used for furnaces (HS 8545.11.00)

Notification No. 23/2018-Customs - Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) (2 February 2018)

Effective 2 February 2018

Elimination of import tariffs on specified parts of cellular mobile phones and other electronic goods (e.g. inputs or parts for use in the manufacture of chargers or adapters for cellular mobile phones (HS 8504.90.90; 3926.90.99)



Decrease of import tariffs on motor cycles (including mopeds) and cycles fitted with an auxiliary motor, with or without side cars, and side cars, new, which have not been registered anywhere prior to importation - (1) as a completely knocked down (CKD) kit containing all the necessary components, parts or sub-assemblies for assembling a complete vehicle with: (from 30% to 25%) (i) engine, gearbox or transmission mechanism in pre-assembled form, not mounted on a body assembly; and (from 60% to 50%) (ii) in a form other than included in (1) above (HS 8711)



- 83 -


Decrease of import tariffs (from 10% to 7.5%) on bricks, blocks, tiles and other ceramic goods of siliceous fossil metals (e.g. kieselguhr, tripolite or diatomite) or of similar siliceous earths (HS 6901). Elimination of import tariffs (from 5%) on solar tempered glass or solar tempered (anti-reflective coated) glass for the manufacture of solar cells/panels/modules (HS Chapter 70)

Notification No. 6/2018-Customs - Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) (2 February 2018) and Finance Bill 2018 (14 March 2018)


Elimination of import tariffs on inputs or parts for the manufacture of printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) and moulded plastics of chargers or adapters of cellular mobile phones (HS 3926.90.99; 8504.90.90)



Extension of the concessional rate (2.5% of the basic customs tariff) on certain products, i.e. ball screws (HS 8483.40.00), linear motion guides (HS 8466.93.90), and CNC systems (HS 8537.10.00) for the manufacture of all types of CNC machine tools falling under HS 8456 and 8463



Elimination of the import ban on second hand goods imported for the purpose of repair/refurbishing/ re-conditioning or re-engineering, subject to items being re-exported

Permanent Delegation of India to the WTO (9 May 2018) and Notification No. 58/2015-2020, Ministry of Commerce and Industry - Directorate General of Foreign Trade (28 March 2018)

Effective 28 March 2018

Indonesia Elimination of VAT on imports of certain products, e.g. certain products of animal origin; maize; oil seeds; miscellaneous grains, fats and oils and their fractions, of fish or marine mammals; inactive yeasts; residues and waste from food industries, prepared animal fodder; and lecithins and other phosphoaminolipids (HS 0505; 0511; 1005; 1201; 1212; 1504; 2102; 2301; 2302; 2303; 2304; 2306; 2308; 2923)

Permanent Delegation of Indonesia to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Regulation 142/PMK.010/2017


Reduction of import tariffs (under the APEC Environmental Goods Initiative) (to 8%) on auxiliary plants for use with boilers; condensers for steam or other vapour power units; non-electric instantaneous or storage water heaters; automatic vending machines; AC generators (alternators) of an output exceeding 750

kVA; and wind-powered generating sets (HS Chapters 44; 84; 85; 90)

Permanent Delegation of Indonesia to the WTO (25 April 2018) and Regulation 213/PMK.010/2017

(29 December 2017)


Elimination of import tariffs (from 10%) on non-industrial diamonds, unworked or simply sawn, cleaved or bruted

Permanent Delegation of Indonesia to the WTO (25 April 2018) and Regulation 17/PMK.010/2018 (1 March 2018)


Japan On 31 March 2018, elimination of "tariff emergency measures" (applied tariff rate (38.5%) back to the bound tariff rate (50%)) on frozen beef (HS 0202) (implemented on 1 August 2017)

Permanent Delegation of Japan to the WTO (25 May 2018)

- 84 -


Elimination of import tariffs on aluminium hydroxide (HS 2818.30), zirconium oxychloride (HS 2827.49), p-tertiary-butylphenol (HS 2907.19), 1-adamantyl trimethylammonium hydroxide "ADAH" and tetraethylammonium hydroxide "TEAH" (HS 2923.90), dysprosium iron alloys (HS 3824.99), single flax yarn (HS 5306.10), ramie yarn (HS 5308.90), and kote for kendo (HS 6216.00). Reduction of import tariffs on certain cosmetics (HS 3307.90) and on apparel and clothing accessories (HS Chapters 61; 62; 63)

Permanent Delegation of Japan to the WTO (25 May 2018)

Effective 1 April 2018

Korea, Rep. of

Trade facilitation measure for importers through the extension of the electronic clearance examination to all goods imported by Authorized Economic Operator companies

Permanent Delegation of Korea to the WTO (4 June 2018)


Mexico

Temporary elimination of import tariffs on onions and lemons (HS 0703.10.01; 0805.50.01; 0805.50.02; 0805.50.99), under certain import quotas

Permanent Delegation of Mexico to the WTO (30 May 2018) and Diario Oficial de la Federación (Official Journal), 26 December 2017


Extension of the temporary elimination of import tariffs on certain toys and baby products (HS 3924.90.99; 8715.00.01; 9401.80.01; 9503.00.01; 9503.00.02; 9503.00.03; 9503.00.04; 9503.00.05; 9503.00.06; 9503.00.11; 9503.00.12; 9503.00.14; 9503.00.15; 9503.00.16; 9503.00.20; 9503.00.24; 9503.00.36; 9503.00.99; 9504.90.99; 9506.62.01), under certain import quotas (originally effective from March 2015 to 31 December 2017)

Permanent Delegation of Mexico to the WTO (30 May 2018) and Diario Oficial de la Federación (Official Journal), 26 December 2017

Effective until 31 December 2020

Elimination of import tariffs on microwave ovens (HS 8516.50.01)

Permanent Delegation of Mexico to the WTO (30 May 2018)

Effective December 2017

Russian Federation

Introduction of import tariff quotas on wood in the rough, whether or not stripped of bark or sapwood, or roughly squared (HS 4403). In-quota rate fixed at 6.5% but not less than €4/m3 (out-of-quota rate for the year 2018 fixed at 25% but not less than €15/m3)

Permanent Delegation of the Russian Federation to the WTO (30 May 2018)


- 85 -


Eurasian Economic Union

Temporary elimination of import tariffs (from 8%) on magnetrons with an operating frequency of at least 2.44 GHz but not more than 2.47 GHz and an output power of not less than 600 W but not more than 1 kW (effective 6 February 2018 to 31 December 2019); (from 5%) on turbo-jets of a kind used in civil aircraft of a thrust exceeding 110 kN but not exceeding 132 kN, and turbo-jets of a kind used in civil aircraft of a thrust exceeding 132 kN but not exceeding 145 kN (effective 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2020); (from 8%/7%/3%) on certain fish and crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates (effective 29 December 2017 to 31 December 2019); (from 8%/5%) on certain preparations of fish or of crustaceans, molluscs or other aquatic invertebrates (effective 29 December 2017 to 31 December 2019); (from 6.5%) on polyethylene of a kind used for applying three-layer anti-corrosion coating on pipes (effective 1 January 2018 to 30 September 2018); and (from 5%)

on compressors of a kind used in refrigerating equipment of a power not exceeding 0.4 kW (effective 3 March 2018 to 31 December 2019) (HS 8540.71.00; 8411.12.30; 8411.12.80; 0306.19.90; 0307.43.19; 0307.43.38; 0307.43.90; 0307.52.90; 1605.40.00; 1605.53.90; 3901.20.90; 8418.30.20)



Reduction of import tariffs (from 10% but not less than €0.25/ kg to 10% plus €0.08/kg) on linoleum; (from 15% but not less than €0.165/l to 15%) on household refrigerators; (from 15% but not less than €0.165/l to 15%) on household freezers of a capacity exceeding 400 l but not exceeding 800 l; (from 15% but not less than €0.16/l to 15%) on household freezers of a capacity exceeding 250 l but not exceeding 900 l; (from 5% but not less than €0.5/1 cm3 of cylinder capacity to 5%) on dumpers designed for off-highway use with compression-ignition internal combustion piston engines (diesel or semi-diesel engines) and of a cylinder capacity exceeding 2,500 cm3 or with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engines and of a cylinder capacity exceeding 2,800cm3 with a number of axles not exceeding two; (from 15% but not less than €2,907 per1 p/st to 15%) on car bodies; (from 9% but not less than €13.8 per 1 t of total weight to 9%) on automobile semi-trailers, with a total weight more than 15 tonnes and with an overall length of less than 13.6 m; and (from 9% but not less than €9.7/m3 of internal body space to 9%) on refrigerating equipment, with an internal body space of not less than 76 m3



Extension of the temporary elimination of import tariffs on cocoa paste and cocoa butter (HS 1803.10.00; 1804.00.00) (originally implemented on 26 March 2016 until 31 December 2017)


Effective 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2019

Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of Trade facilitation measure for importers through the implementation of a National Single Window and the "Authorized Economic Operator" scheme

Permanent Delegation of Saudi Arabia to the WTO (30 May 2018)


Trade facilitation measure for exporters through the implementation of a National Single Window and the "Authorized Economic Operator" scheme

Permanent Delegation of Saudi Arabia to the WTO (30 May 2018)


- 86 -


Turkey Temporary elimination of import tariffs (from 19.3%) on certain dried leguminous vegetables (e.g. chickpeas (garbanzos), beans) (effective 2 December 2017 to 1 June 2018); and (from 35%) on barley (effective 31 December 2017 to 1 April 2018). Temporary reduction of import tariffs (from 34% to 5%) on paddy or rough rice; (from 45% to 10%) on brown rice; and (from 45% to 15%) on semi-milled or wholly milled rice, and broken rice (effective 31 December 2017 to 1 July 2018)

Permanent Delegation of Turkey to the WTO (30 May 2018)


Elimination of import tariffs (from 4%) on bran of maize (corn); (from 5%) on bran of other cereals or leguminous plants; (from 2%) on flours of fish (effective 22 November 2017); (from 7.8%) on pure-bred breeding bovine animals; and (from 10%) on live bovine animals for stockbreeding (effective 31 December 2017). Reduction of import tariffs (from 30% to 10%) on cashew nuts; (from 43.2% to 15%) on almonds and walnuts; and (from 13.5% to 6.5%) on certain residues of cotton seeds, linseed, sunflower seed, rape or colza seed; and on residues of other seeds (effective 31 December 2017)



- 87 -

ANNEX 2

TRADE REMEDIES1




Argentina

Initiation on 7 November 2017 of AD investigation on imports of vacuum cleaners (NCM 8508.11.00; 8508.19.00) from China

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/ARG, 16 February 2018

Termination on 1 December 2017 of AD duties on imports of woven fabrics of wool (NCM 5112.11.00; 5112.19.10; 5112.20.10; 5112.30.10; 5112.90.00; 5515.13.00) from Brazil, China and Peru (investigation initiated on 31 May 2016 and provisional duty imposed on 7 December 2016)


Termination on 31 December 2017 of AD duties on imports of electrical connection terminals for cable diameters of up to 35 mm2 (NCM 8536.10; 8536.50; 8536.90) from Germany (imposed on 4 September 2009)


Termination on 16 February 2018 (without measure) of AD investigation on imports of electrical transformers having a power handling capacity exceeding 10,000 kVA but not exceeding 600,000 kVA (NCM 8504.23.00) from India (initiated on 19 August 2016)

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Resolución No. 76/2018 Ministerio de Producción (15 February 2018)

Initiation on 21 February 2018 of AD investigation on imports of denim (tejidos de mezclilla) (NCM 5208.43.00; 5209.42.10; 5209.42.90; 5209.49.00; 5210.49.10; 5211.42.10; 5211.42.90; 5211.49.00) from Brazil, China and Peru

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Resolución No. 82/2018 Secretaría de Comercio, Ministerio de Producción (20 February 2018)

Termination on 21 February 2018 of AD duties on imports of men's or boys' suits, blazers and jackets (NCM 6203.11.00; 6203.12.00; 6203.19.00; 6203.22.00; 6203.23.00; 6203.29.10; 6203.29.90; 6203.31.00; 6203.32.00; 6203.33.00; 6203.39.00) from China (investigation initiated on 16 February 2010 and definitive duty imposed on 3 January 2012)

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Resolución No. 88/2018 Ministerio de Producción (20 February 2018)

Initiation on 28 February 2018 of AD investigation on imports of zinc oxide (blanco de cinc) (NCM 2817.00.10) from Brazil and Peru

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Resolución No. 103/2018 Secretaría de Comercio, Ministerio de Producción (26 February 2018)

Initiation on 5 March 2018 of AD investigation on imports of pliers (tenazas de mano) (NCM 8203.20.90) from China and India

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Resolución No. 116/2018 Secretaría de

Comercio, Ministerio de Producción (1 March 2018)




- 88 -


Initiation on 23 April 2018 of AD investigation on imports of shock absorbers for motorcycles (NCM 8714.10.00; 8714.99.90) from China

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Resolución No. 235/2018 Secretaría de Comercio, Ministerio de Producción (20 April 2018)

Termination on 23 April 2018 (without measure) of AD investigation on imports of emergency lighting devices (NCM 9405.10.99) from China (initiated on 5 September 2017)

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Resolución No. 237/2018 Secretaría de Comercio, Ministerio de Producción (20 April 2018)

Australia

Initiation on 19 October 2017 of AD investigation on imports of certain aluminium extrusions (HS 7604.10.00; 7604.21.00; 7604.29.00; 7608.10.00; 7608.20.00; 7610.10.00; 7610.90.00) from China and Thailand

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/AUS, 13 March 2018

Initiation on 13 November 2017 of AD investigation on imports of steel pallet racking (HS 7308.90.00) from China and Malaysia

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/AUS/Corr.1, 21 March 2018

Termination on 20 December 2017 of AD duties on imports of hot rolled coil steel "HRC" (HS 7208.25.00; 7208.26.00; 7208.27.00; 7208.36.00; 7208.37.00; 7208.38.00; 7208.39.00; 7208.53.00; 7208.54.00; 7208.90.00; 7211.14.00; 7211.19.00) from Japan; Korea, Rep. of and Malaysia (investigation initiated on 15 June 2012. Provisional and definitive duties imposed on 5 October and 20 December 2012)

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/AUS, 13 March 2018

Termination on 6 February 2018 (without measure) of AD investigation on imports of certain wind towers (HS 7308.20.00; 7308.90.00; 8502.31.10)

from Viet Nam (initiated on 8 June 2017)

Permanent Delegation of Australia to the WTO (25 May 2018) and Australia

Customs Dumping Notice No. 2018/20 (5 February 2018)

Initiation on 19 March 2018 of AD investigation on imports of A4 copy paper (HS 4802.56.10) from Austria; Finland; Korea, Rep. of; the Russian Federation and the Slovak Republic

Permanent Delegation of Australia to the WTO (25 May 2018) and Australia Customs Dumping Notice No. 2018/39 (19 March 2018)

Termination on 23 March 2018 (without measure) of AD investigation on imports of steel rod in coils (HS 7213.91.00; 7227.90.90) from Indonesia; Korea, Rep. of and Viet Nam (investigation initiated on 7 June 2017)

Permanent Delegation of Australia to the WTO (25 May 2018) and Australia Customs Dumping Notice No. 2018/53 (26 March 2018)

Initiation on 18 April 2018 of AD investigation on imports of railway wheels (HS 8607.19.00) from China and France

Permanent Delegation of Australia to the WTO (25 May 2018) and Australia Customs Dumping Notice No. 2018/59 (18 April 2018)

Initiation on 18 April 2018 of CVD investigation on imports of railway wheels (HS 8607.19.00) from China

Permanent Delegation of Australia to the WTO (25 May 2018) and Australia Customs Dumping Notice No. 2018/59 (18 April 2018)

Resumption on 2 May 2018 of AD investigation on imports of alloy round steel bars (HS 7228.20.10; 7228.20.90; 7228.30.10; 7228.30.90; 7228.60.10; 7228.60.90) from China (originally initiated on 10 January 2017 and terminated on 25 January 2018)

Permanent Delegation of Australia to the WTO (25 May 2018) and Australia Customs Dumping Notice Nos. 2018/17 (25 January 2018) and 2018/73 (2 May 2018)

- 89 -


Brazil Initiation on 17 October 2017 of AD investigation on imports of plasterboards or plaster compositions, faced or reinforced with paper or paperboard only (NCM 6809.11.00) from Mexico

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/BRA, 11 April 2018; and Camex Resolution No. 19/2018 (27 March 2018)

Provisional duty imposed on 28 March 2018

Termination on 18 October 2017 of AD duties on imports of cold polymerized emulsion styrene-butadiene rubber (E-SBR) (NCM 4002.19.11; 4002.19.19) from the European Union (investigation initiated on 27 May 2014 and definitive duty imposed on 20 November 2015)

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/BRA, 11 April 2018

Termination on 7 December 2017 of AD duties on imports of stainless steel cutlery of a high standard (NCM 8211.10.00; 8211.91.00; 8215.20.00; 8215.99.10) from China (investigation initiated on 13 June 2011 and definitive duty imposed on 6 December 2012)

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/BRA, 11 April 2018

Initiation on 2 January 2018 of AD investigation on imports of poly(ethylene terephthalate) films (NCM 3920.62.19; 3920.62.91; 3920.62.99) from the Kingdom of Bahrain and Peru

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO (25 May 2018) and Secex Circular No. 68 (29 December 2017)

Temporary suspension on 18 January 2018 of AD duties on imports of hot-rolled steel (NCM

7208.10.00; 7208.25.00; 7208.26.10; 7208.26.90; 7208.27.10; 7208.27.90; 7208.36.10; 7208.36.90; 7208.37.00; 7208.38.10; 7208.38.90; 7208.39.10; 7208.39.90; 7208.40.00; 7208.53.00; 7208.54.00; 7208.90.00; 7225.30.00; 7225.40.90) from China and the Russian Federation (investigation initiated on 20 July 2016 and definitive duty imposed on 18 January 2018)

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO (25 May 2018)

Initiation on 26 March 2018 of AD investigation on imports of rolls for rolling mills (NCM 8455.30.10; 8455.30.90) from China

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO (25 May 2018) and Secex Circular No. 14/2018 (23 March 2018)

Termination on 9 April 2018 of AD duties on imports of light-weight coated paper (NCM 4810.22.90) from Canada and the United States (investigation initiated on 10 December 2010. Provisional and definitive duties imposed on 10 November 2011 and 23 April 2012)

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO (25 May 2018) and Camex Resolution No. 25/2018 (23 March 2018)

Canada Initiation on 27 October 2017 of AD investigation on imports of certain copper pipe fittings (HS 7412.10.00; 7412.20.00) from Viet Nam

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/CAN, 14 March 2018

Provisional duty imposed on 25 January 2018

Initiation on 27 October 2017 of CVD investigation on imports of certain copper pipe fittings (HS

7412.10.00; 7412.20.00) from Viet Nam

WTO document G/SCM/N/328/CAN,

26 March 2018

Provisional duty imposed on

25 January 2018 Termination on 2 November 2017 of AD duties on imports of certain silicon metals (HS 2804.69.00) from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Malaysia and Thailand (investigation initiated on 20 February 2017 and provisional duty imposed on 5 July 2017)

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/CAN, 14 March 2018

Termination on 2 November 2017 of CVD duties on imports of certain silicon metals (HS 2804.69.00) from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia and Norway (investigation initiated on 20 February 2017 and provisional duty imposed on 5 July 2017)

WTO document G/SCM/N/328/CAN, 26 March 2018

Initiation on 28 December 2017 of AD investigation on imports of certain dry wheat pasta (HS 1902.19.21; 1902.19.22; 1902.19.23; 1902.19.29; 1902.19.93; 1902.19.91; 1902.19.99; 1902.19.92) from Turkey

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/CAN, 14 March 2018; Permanent Delegation of Canada to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Canada Border Service Agency Notice DWP 2017 IN (28 March 2018)


- 90 -


Initiation on 28 December 2017 of CVD investigation on imports of certain dry wheat pasta (HS 1902.19.21; 1902.19.22; 1902.19.23; 1902.19.29; 1902.19.93; 1902.19.91; 1902.19.99; 1902.19.92) from Turkey

WTO document G/SCM/N/328/CAN, 26 March 2018; Permanent Delegation of Canada to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Canada Border Service Agency Notice DWP 2017 IN (28 March 2018)


Termination on 16 March 2018 of AD investigation on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate (PET resin) (HS 3907.61.00; 3907.69.00) from China, India, Oman and Pakistan (investigation initiated on 18 August 2017 and provisional duty imposed on 16 November 2017)

Permanent Delegation of Canada to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Canadian International Trade Tribunal Inquiry No. NQ-2017-003 (16 March 2018)

Termination on 16 March 2018 of CVD duties on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate (PET resin) (HS 3907.61.00; 3907.69.00) from China, India, Oman and Pakistan (investigation initiated on 18 August 2017 and provisional duty imposed on 16 November 2017)

Permanent Delegation of Canada to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Canadian International Trade Tribunal Inquiry No. NQ-2017-003 (16 March 2018)

China

Initiation on 16 October 2017 of AD investigation on imports of hydriodic acid (HS 2811.19.90) from Japan and the United States

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/CHN, 18 April 2018

Initiation on 30 October 2017 of AD investigation on imports of ethanolamines (HS 2922.11.00; 2922.12.00; 2922.13.10) from Malaysia; Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of; Thailand and the United States


Initiation on 9 November 2017 of AD investigation on imports of acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (NBR) (HS 4002.59.10; 4002.59.90) from Japan and Korea, Rep. of


Initiation on 29 December 2017 of AD investigation on imports of butan-1-ol (n-butyl alcohol) (HS 2905.13.00) from Malaysia, Chinese Taipei and the United States


Initiation on 23 January 2018 of AD investigation on imports of ortho dichlorobenzene (ODCB) (HS 2903.91.10) from India and Japan

Permanent Delegation of China to the WTO (28 May 2018) and MOFCOM Announcement No. 6/2018 (24 January 2018)

Provisional duty imposed on 20 April 2018

Initiation on 4 February 2018 of AD investigation on imports of grain sorghum (HS 1007.90.00) from the United States

Permanent Delegation of China to the WTO (28 May 2018) and MOFCOM Announcement Nos. 12/2018 (4 February 2018) and 38/2018 (18 April 2018)


Initiation on 4 February 2018 of CVD investigation on imports of grain sorghum (HS 1007.90.00) from the United States

Permanent Delegation of China to the WTO (28 May 2018) and MOFCOM Announcement Nos. 13/2018 (4 February 2018) and 38/2018 (18 April 2018)


Termination on 27 February 2018 of AD duties on imports of broiler chicken products (HS 0207.11.00; 0207.12.00; 0207.13.11; 0207.13.19; 0207.13.21; 0207.13.29; 0207.14.11; 0207.14.19; 0207.14.21; 0207.14.22; 0207.14.29; 0504.00.21) from the United States (investigation initiated on 27 September 2009. Provisional and definitive duties imposed on 5 February and 27 September 2010)

Permanent Delegation of China to the WTO (28 May 2018) and MOFCOM Announcement No. 5/2018 (27 February 2018)

- 91 -


Termination on 27 February 2018 of CVD duties investigation on imports of broiler chicken products (HS 0207.11.00; 0207.12.00; 0207.13.11; 0207.13.19; 0207.13.21; 0207.13.29; 0207.14.11; 0207.14.19; 0207.14.21; 0207.14.22; 0207.14.29; 0504.00.21) from the United States (investigation initiated on 27 September 2009. Provisional and definitive duties imposed on 28 April and 29 August 2010)

Permanent Delegation of China to the WTO (28 May 2018) and MOFCOM Announcement No. 5/2018 (27 February 2018)

Termination on 13 March 2018 of AD duties on imports of toluene diisocyanate (TDI80/20) (HS 2929.10.10) from the European Union (investigation initiated on 23 March 2012. Provisional and definitive duties imposed on 13 November 2012 and 12 March 2013)

Permanent Delegation of China to the WTO (28 May 2018) and MOFCOM Announcement No. 26/2018 (12 March 2018)

Initiation on 26 March 2018 of AD investigation on imports of phenol (HS 2907.11.10) from the European Union; Japan; Korea, Rep. of; Thailand and the United States

Permanent Delegation of China to the WTO (28 May 2018) and MOFCOM Announcement No. 33/2018 (28 March 2018)

European Union Initiation on 20 October 2017 of AD investigation on imports of electric bicycles "e-bikes" (HS 711.60.10; 8711.60.90) from China

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/EU, 29 March 2018

Initiation on 19 December 2017 of AD investigation on imports of silicon (HS 2804.69.00) from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Brazil

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/EU, 29 March 2018

Initiation on 21 December 2017 of CVD investigation on imports of electric bicycles "e-bikes" (HS 8711.60.10; 8711.60.90) from China

WTO document G/SCM/N/328/EU, 28 March 2018

Termination on 30 January 2018 (without measure) of AD investigation on imports of certain cast iron articles (HS 7325.10.00; 7325.99.10) from India (initiated on 10 December 2016)

Commission Implementing Regulation No. 2018/140 (29 January 2018)

Initiation on 31 January 2018 of CVD investigation

on imports of biodiesel (HS 1516.20.98; 1518.00.91; 1518.00.95; 1518.00.99; 2710.19.43; 2710.19.46; 2710.19.47; 2710.20.11; 2710.20.15; 2710.20.17; 3824.99.92; 3826.00.10; 3826.00.90) from Argentina

Commission Notice 2018/C

34/11 (31 December 2017)

Initiation on 26 March 2018 of safeguard investigation on imports of certain steel products (HS Chapters 72 and 73)

Commission Notice 2018/C 111/10 (26 March 2018) and WTO document G/SG/N/6/EU/1, 27 March 2018

India Initiation on 2 November 2017 of AD investigation on imports of uncoated copier paper (HS 4802) from Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/IND, 19 April 2018

Termination on 28 November 2017 (without measure) of AD investigation on imports of n-butyl alcohol (HS 2905.13.00) from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (investigation initiated on 2 September 2016)


Termination on 9 November 2017 of AD duties on imports of metronidazole (HS 3004.90.22) from China (imposed on 17 April 2000)


Termination on 9 November 2017 of AD duties on imports of cellophane transparent film (HS 3920.71.11) from China (imposed on 30 March 2006)


- 92 -


Termination on 9 November 2017 of AD duties on imports of geogrid/geostrips/geostraps made of polyester or glass fiber in all its forms (including all widths and lengths) (HS 3902.10.00; 3914.00.90; 3920.10.19; 3926.90.99; 5503.40.00; 5603.13.30; 5603.94.00; 5604.90.00; 5903.10.90; 5911.10.00; 5911.31.50; 5911.31.90; 5911.90.90; 7019.40.00; 7019.59.00; 7019.90.10; 7019.90.90) from China (investigation initiated on 20 December 2010 and definitive duty imposed on 24 January 2012)


Termination on 9 November 2017 of AD duties on imports of phosphoric acid of all grades and all concentrations (excluding agriculture/ fertilizer grade) (HS 2809.20.10) from Israel and Chinese Taipei (investigation initiated on 4 February 2011. Provisional and definitive duties imposed on 13 January and 4 April 2012)


Termination on 23 November 2017 of AD duties on imports of phosphoric acid - technical grade and food grade (HS 2809.20.10) from China (imposed on 14 September 2007)


Termination on 25 November 2017 of AD duties on imports of caustic soda-I (HS 2815.11.10; 2815.11.20) from Iran, Islamic Rep. of (imposed on 26 December 2000)


Termination on 11 December 2017 (without measure) of AD investigation on imports of polybutadiene rubber (butadiene rubber "PBR") (HS 4002.20.00) from Iran, Islamic Rep. of; Korea, Rep. of; Russian Federation; Singapore and South Africa (investigation initiated on 16 September 2016)


Termination on 13 December 2017 of AD duties on imports of sodium hydrosulphite–I (HS 2831; 2832) from China (imposed on 28 March 2001)


Initiation on 19 December 2017 of AD investigation on imports of sodium nitrite (HS 2834.10) from the Russian Federation


Initiation on 19 December 2017 of safeguard investigation on imports of solar cells, whether or not assembled in modules or panels

(HS 8541.40.11)

WTO document G/SG/N/6/IND/44, 3 January 2018

Termination on 20 December 2017 of AD duties on imports of choline chloride, in all forms and concentrations, used for animal feed (HS 2309.90.10; 2923.10.00) from China (investigation initiated on 25 October 2011 and definitive duty imposed on 21 December 2012)


Termination on 30 December 2017 of AD duties on imports of saccharin (HS 2925.11.00) from China (imposed on 6 June 2006)


Termination on 31 December 2017 of safeguard duties on imports of sodium citrate (HS 2918.15.20) (investigation initiated on 4 March 2014 and definitive duty imposed on 31 December 2014)

Permanent Delegation of India to the WTO (9 May 2018)

Initiation on 2 January 2018 of AD investigation on imports of zeolite 4A (detergent grade) (HS 2839.90.90) from China

Permanent Delegation of India to the WTO (9 May 2018) and Notification F. No. 6/14/2017-DGAD - (Case No. OI-25/2017) Ministry of Commerce and Industry - Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties (2 January 2018)

- 93 -


Initiation on 2 January 2018 of AD investigation on imports of fluoroelastomers "FKM" (HS 3904) from China


Initiation on 17 January 2018 of AD investigation on imports of sun- and/or dust-control film (HS 3920.69.29) from China; Hong Kong, China; Korea, Rep. of and Chinese Taipei

Permanent Delegation of India to the WTO (9 May 2018) and Notification No. 6/44/2017-DGAD - Ministry of Commerce and Industry - Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties (17 January 2018)

Initiation on 22 January 2018 of AD investigation on imports of dimethylformamide "DMF" (HS 2921.11.10) from China, Germany and Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of

Permanent Delegation of India to the WTO (9 May 2018) and Notification F. No. 6/37/2017-DGAD - Ministry of Commerce and Industry - Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties (22 January 2018)

Initiation on 23 January 2018 of AD investigation on imports of coated paper (HS 4810) from China, the European Union and the United States


Initiation on 24 January 2018 of AD investigation on imports of meta-phenylene diamene-4-sulphonic acid "MPDSA" (HS 2922.29.26) from China

Permanent Delegation of India to the WTO (9 May 2018) and Notification F. No. 6/35/2017-DGAD - Ministry of Commerce and Industry - Directorate

General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties (24 January 2018)

Initiation on 5 February 2018 of AD investigation on imports of textured tempered glass whether coated or uncoated (HS 7007.19.00; 7003.19.90; 7005.10.10; 7005.10.90; 7005.21.90; 7005.29.90; 7005.30.90) from Malaysia

Permanent Delegation of India to the WTO (9 May 2018) and Notification F. No. 6/45/2017-DGAD - Ministry of Commerce and Industry - Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties (5 February 2018)

Initiation on 7 February 2018 of AD investigation on imports of flax yarn (HS 5306.10.90; 5306.20.90) from China

Permanent Delegation of India to the WTO (9 May 2018) and Notification F. No. 6/3/2018-DGAD - (Case No. OI-3/2018) Ministry of Commerce and Industry - Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties (7 February 2018)

Termination on 13 March 2018 of safeguard duties on imports of hot-rolled flat products of non-alloy and other alloy steel in coils of a width of 600 mm or more (HS 7208; 7225.30.90) (initiated on 7 September 2015. Provisional and definitive duties imposed on 14 September 2015 and 29 March 2016)

Permanent Delegation of India to the WTO (9 May 2018)

Initiation on 27 March 2018 of CVD investigation on imports of new pneumatic tyres for buses and lorries (HS 4011.20) from China

Notification F. No. 6/8/2018-DGAD - Ministry of Commerce and Industry - Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties (27 March 2018)

- 94 -


Initiation on 4 April 2018 of AD investigation on imports of certain epoxy resins (epoxide resins) (HS 3907.30.10; 3907.30.90) from China; the European Union; Korea, Rep. of; Chinese Taipei and Thailand

Notification F. No. 6/10/2018-DGAD - (Case No. OI-7/2018) Ministry of Commerce and Industry - Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties (4 April 2018)

Initiation on 4 April 2018 of AD investigation on imports of ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) sheet for solar modules (HS 3901; 3902; 3921) from China;Korea, Rep. of; Malaysia; Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of and Thailand

Notification F. No. 6/9/2018-DGAD - (Case No. OI. 6/2018) Ministry of Commerce and Industry - Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties (4 April 2018)

Initiation on 10 April 2018 of AD investigation on imports of non-plasticized industrial grade nitrocellulose (excluding nitrocellulose damped in ethanol and waterwet) (HS 3912.20.19) from Brazil, Indonesia and Thailand

Notification F. No. 6/12/2018-DGAD - (Case No. OI-9/2018) Ministry of Commerce and Industry - Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties (10 April 2018)

Indonesia Initiation on 27 October 2017 of AD investigation on imports of spin drawn yarn "SDY" (HS 5402.47.00) from China

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/IDN, 20 April 2018

Initiation on 29 March 2018 of safeguard investigation on imports of ceramic flags and paving, hearth or wall tiles; and ceramic mosaic cubes and the like, whether or not on a backing (HS 6907)

WTO document G/SG/N/6/IDN/28, 3 April 2018

Korea, Rep. of

Termination on 29 December 2017 of AD duties on imports of PET film (HS 3920.62) from Japan (investigation initiated on 2 December 2013 and definitive duty imposed on 30 December 2014)

Permanent Delegation of Korea to the WTO (4 June 2018)

Mexico Initiation on 14 November 2017 of AD investigation on imports of steel plate in sheets (HS 7208.51.01; 7208.51.02; 7208.51.03; 7208.52.01; 7225.40.99) from Italy and Japan

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/MEX, 12 March 2018

Termination on 15 January 2018 of AD duties on imports of graphite electrodes for electric arc furnaces (HS 8545.11.01) from China (investigation initiated on 1 September 2010. Provisional and definitive duties imposed on 31 May 2011 and 1 March 2012)

Permanent Delegation of Mexico to the WTO (30 May 2018) and Diario Oficial de la Federación (Official Journal), 15 January 2018

Initiation on 6 February 2018 of AD investigation on imports of short-fibre polyester (HS 5503.20.01; 5503.20.99) from China

Permanent Delegation of Mexico to the WTO (30 May 2018) and Diario Oficial de la Federación (Official Journal), 6 February 2018

Termination on 6 March 2018 of AD duties on imports of monobutyl ether of ethylene glycol (HS 2909.43.01) from the United States (investigation initiated on 11 March 2011. Provisional and definitive duties imposed on 9 April and 12 September 2012)

Permanent Delegation of Mexico to the WTO (30 May 2018) and Diario Oficial de la Federación (Official Journal), 6 March 2018

South Africa (for SACU - Southern African Customs Union - Botswana, Eswatini, Lesotho, Namibia and South Africa)

Initiation on 20 April 2018 of safeguard investigation on imports of other screws fully threaded with hexagon heads made of steel (HS 7318.15.39)

WTO document G/SG/N/6/ZAF/6, 24 April 2018

Termination on 4 May 2018 of AD duties on imports of fully threaded screws with hexagon heads, excluding those of stainless steel (HS 7318.15.39) from China (investigation initiated on 18 November 2011. Provisional and definitive duties imposed on 4 May and 16 November 2012)

Permanent Delegation of South Africa to the WTO (28 May 2018) and International Trade Administration Commission Notice No. R. 470 - Government Gazette No. 41605 (4 May 2018)

- 95 -


Turkey Termination on 28 November 2017 (without measure) of AD investigation on imports of tubes and pipes of cast iron (HS 7303.00.10; 7303.00.90) from India and the United Arab Emirates (initiated on 31 July 2016)

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/TUR, 14 March 2018

Initiation on 28 November 2017 of AD investigation on imports of polycarboxylate polymers (HS 3824.40; 3906.90.90) from Korea, Rep. of


Initiation on 30 November 2017 of AD investigation on imports of lighters (gas, oven and cooker component) (HS 9613.80.00) from China


Termination on 29 December 2017 of AD duties on imports of copper wired rod (HS 7408.11) from the Russian Federation (imposed on 9 November 2005)


Termination on 29 December 2017 of AD duties on imports of copper wired rod (HS 7408.11) from Ukraine (imposed on 8 June 2006)


Termination on 5 January 2018 (without measure) of safeguard investigation on imports of pneumatic tyres (HS 4011.10; 4011.20; 4011.70; 4011.80; 4011.90; 8708.70) (initiated on 6 April 2017)

WTO document G/SG/N/6/TUR/22/Suppl.1, 17 January 2018

Initiation on 23 February 2018 of safeguard investigation on imports of wallpaper and similar wallcoverings (HS 4814.20.00; 4814.90.10; 4814.90.70)

WTO document G/SG/N/6/TUR/20/Suppl.1, 9 March 2018

Initiation on 6 March 2018 of AD investigation on imports of cored wire of base metal, for electric arc-welding (HS 8311.20.00) from Viet Nam


Initiation on 20 March 2018 of CVD investigation on imports of acrylic or modacrylic (HS 5501.30.00) from China


Initiation on 21 March 2018 of AD investigation on imports of acrylic or modacrylic (HS 5501.30.00) from China; Germany; Korea, Rep. of and Thailand


Initiation on 27 April 2018 of safeguard investigation on imports of iron and steel products (HS 7208; 7209; 7210; 7211; 7212; 7225; 7226; 7213; 7214; 7215; 7216; 7217; 7227; 7228; 7302; 7303; 7304; 7305; 7306; 7219; 7220)

WTO document G/SG/N/6/TUR/24, 3 May 2018

United States of America

Termination on 16 October 2017 (without measure) of AD investigation on imports of titanium sponge (HS 8108.20.00) from Japan and Kazakhstan (initiated on 20 September 2017)

WTO document G/ADP/N/308/USA, 21 March 2018

Termination on 16 October 2017 (without measure) of CVD investigation on imports of titanium sponge (HS 8108.20.00) from Kazakhstan (initiated on 20 September 2017)

WTO document G/SCM/N/328/USA, 22 February 2018

Initiation on 23 October 2017 of AD investigation on imports of polyethylene terephthalate "PET" resin (HS 3907.61.00; 3907.69.00) from Brazil; Indonesia; Korea, Rep. of; Pakistan and Chinese Taipei


Initiation on 26 October 2017 of AD investigation on

imports of polytetrafluoroethylene "PTFE" resin (HS 3904.61.00; 3904.69.50) from China and India

WTO document

G/ADP/N/308/USA, 21 March 2018

Initiation on 26 October 2017 of CVD investigation on imports of polytetrafluoroethylene "PTFE" resin (HS 3904.61.00; 3904.69.50) from India


- 96 -


Initiation on 1 November 2017 of AD investigation on imports of forged steel fittings (HS 7307.99.10; 7307.99.30; 7307.99.50; 7307.92.30; 7307.92.90; 7326.19.00) from China, Italy and Chinese Taipei


Initiation on 1 November 2017 of CVD investigation on imports of forged steel fittings (HS 7307.99.10; 7307.99.30; 7307.99.50; 7307.92.30; 7307.92.90; 7326.19.00) from China


Initiation on 28 November 2017 of AD investigation on imports of common alloy aluminium sheet (HS 7606.12.30; 7606.11.30; 7606.11.60; 7606.12.60; 7606.91.30; 7606.91.60; 7606.92.30; 7606.92.60; 7607.11.90) from China


Initiation on 4 December 2017 of CVD investigation on imports of common alloy aluminium sheet (HS 7606.12.30; 7606.11.30; 7606.11.60; 7606.12.60;

7606.91.30; 7606.91.60; 7606.92.30; 7606.92.60; 7607.11.90) from China


Initiation on 20 December 2017 of AD investigation on imports of sodium gluconate, gluconic acid and derivative products (HS 2918.16.10; 2918.16.50; 2932.20.50; 2918.16.50; 3824.99.28; 3824.99.92) from China and France

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration A-427-829 and A-570-071 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 516 (4 January 2018)

Terminated on 22 January 2018 on imports from France

Initiation on 20 December 2017 of CVD investigation on imports of sodium gluconate, gluconic acid and derivative products (HS 2918.16.10; 2918.16.50; 2932.20.50; 2918.16.50; 3824.99.28; 3824.99.92) from China

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration C-570-072 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 499 (4 January 2018)

Initiation on 16 January 2018 of AD investigation on imports of certain plastic decorative ribbon (HS 3920.20.00; 3926.40.00; 3920.10.00; 3920.30.00; 3920.43.50; 3920.49.00; 3920.62.00; 3920.69.00; 3921.90.11; 3921.90.15; 3921.90.19; 3921.90.40; 3926.90.99; 5404.90.00; 9505.90.40; 4601.99.90; 4602.90.00; 5609.00.30; 5609.00.40; 6307.90.98) from China

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration A-570-075 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 3126 (23 January 2018)

Initiation on 16 January 2018 of CVD investigation on imports of certain plastic decorative ribbon (HS 3920.20.00; 3926.40.00; 3920.10.00; 3920.30.00; 3920.43.50; 3920.49.00; 3920.62.00; 3920.69.00; 3921.90.11; 3921.90.15; 3921.90.19; 3921.90.40; 3926.90.99; 5404.90.00; 9505.90.40; 4601.99.90; 4602.90.00; 5609.00.30; 5609.00.40; 6307.90.98) from China

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration C-570-076 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 3114 (23 January 2018)

Termination on 2 February 2018 of AD duties on imports of 100- to 150-seat large civil aircraft (HS 8802.40.00) from Canada (investigation initiated on 26 May 2017 and provisional duty imposed on 13 October 2017)

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018)

Termination on 2 February 2018 of CVD duties on imports of 100- to 150-seat large civil aircraft (HS 8802.40.00) from Canada (investigation initiated on 26 May 2017 and provisional duty imposed on 2 October 2017)

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018)

- 97 -


Initiation on 9 February 2018 of AD investigation on imports of large diameter welded pipe (HS 7305.11.10; 7305.11.50; 7305.12.10; 7305.12.50; 7305.19.10; 7305.19.50; 7305.31.40; 7305.31.60; 7305.39.10; 7305.39.50) from Canada; China; Greece; India; Korea, Rep. of and Turkey

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration A-122-863, TA-484-803, TA-533-881, A-570-077, A-580-897 and A-489-833 Federal Register/ Vol 83 FR No. 7154 (20 February 2018)

Initiation on 9 February 2018 of CVD investigation on imports of large diameter welded pipe (HS 7305.11.10; 7305.11.50; 7305.12.10; 7305.12.50; 7305.19.10; 7305.19.50; 7305.31.40; 7305.31.60; 7305.39.10; 7305.39.50) from China; India; Korea, Rep. of and Turkey

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration C-533-882, C-570-078, C-580-898 and C-489-834 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 7148 (20 February 2018)

Initiation on 15 February 2018 of AD investigation on imports of cast iron soil pipes (HS 7303.00.00) from China

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration A-570-079 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 8053 (23 February 2018)

Initiation on 15 February 2018 of CVD investigation on imports of cast iron soil pipes (HS 7303.00.00) from China

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration C-570-080 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 8047 (23 February 2018)

Initiation on 20 February 2018 of AD investigation

on imports of rubber bands (HS 4016.99.35; 4016.99.60) from China, Sri Lanka and Thailand

Permanent Delegation of the

United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration A-570-069, A-542-802 and A-549-835 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 8424 (27 February 2018)

Terminated on

22 March 2018 on imports from Sri Lanka

Initiation on 20 February 2018 of CVD investigation on imports of rubber bands (HS 4016.99.35; 4016.99.60) from China, Sri Lanka and Thailand

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration C-549-836, C-570-070 and C-542-803 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 8429 (27 February 2018)

Terminated on 22 March 2018 on imports from Sri Lanka

Initiation on 27 March 2018 of AD investigation on imports of laminated woven sacks (HS 6305.33.00; 3923.21.00; 3923.29.00; 3917.39.00; 3921.90.11; 3921.90.15; 5903.90.25; 4601.99.05; 4601.99.90; 4602.90.00) from Viet Nam

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration A-552-823 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 14257 (3 April 2018)

Initiation on 27 March 2018 of CVD investigation on imports of laminated woven sacks (HS 6305.33.00; 3923.21.00; 3923.29.00; 3917.39.00; 3921.90.11; 3921.90.15; 5903.90.25; 4601.99.05; 4601.99.90; 4602.90.00) from Viet Nam

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration C-552-824 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 14253 (3 April 2018)

- 98 -


Initiation on 16 April 2018 of AD investigation on imports of certain steel wheels (HS 8708.70.45; 8708.70.60; 8716.90.50; 4011.20.10; 4011.20.50; 8708.99.48) from China

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration A-570-082 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 17798 (24 April 2018)

Initiation on 16 April 2018 of CVD investigation on imports of certain steel wheels (HS 8708.70.45; 8708.70.60; 8716.90.50; 4011.20.10; 4011.20.50; 8708.99.48) from China

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration C-570-083 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 17794 (24 April 2018)

Initiation on 17 April 2018 of AD investigation on imports of glycine (HS 2922.49.43; 2922.49.80) from India, Japan and Thailand

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration A-533-883, A-588-878 and A-549-837 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 17995 (25 April 2018)

Initiation on 17 April 2018 of CVD investigation on imports of glycine (HS 2922.49.43; 2922.49.80) from China, India and Thailand

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration C-533-884, C-570-081 and C-549-838 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 18002 (25 April 2018)

Initiation on 7 May 2018 of AD investigation on imports of certain quartz surface products (HS 6810.99.00; 6810.11.00; 6810.19.12; 6810.19.14; 6810.19.50; 6810.91.00; 6815.99.40; 2506.10.00;

2506.20.00) from China

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International

Trade Administration A-570-084 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 22613 (16 May 2018)

Initiation on 7 May 2018 of CVD investigation on imports of certain quartz surface products (HS 6810.99.00; 6810.11.00; 6810.19.12; 6810.19.14; 6810.19.50; 6810.91.00; 6815.99.40; 2506.10.00; 2506.20.00) from China

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration C-570-085 Federal Register/Vol 83 FR No. 22618 (16 May 2018)

- 99 -

ANNEX 3

OTHER TRADE AND TRADE-RELATED MEASURES1




Argentina Updated list of "criterion values" (valores criterio de carácter preventivo) for imports of certain sugar confectionery (caramelos blandos) (NCM 1704.90.20), from specific origins

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Administración Federal de Ingresos Públicos - Resolución General No. 4144-E (12 October 2017)


Temporary export ban on iron and steel ferrous waste and scrap (NCM 7204; 7404; 7602)

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Decreto No. 848/2017 (23 October 2017)

Effective 27 October 2017, for 360 days

Amendments introduced to the list of products requiring non-automatic import licensing

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO

(28 May 2018) and Resolución Secretaría de Comercio Nos. 898/2017 (24 November 2017), E-8/2018 (8 January 2018) and 170/2018 (27 March 2018)


Updated list of "criterion values" (valores criterio de carácter preventivo) for imports of boilers (NCM 8403.10.10), from specific origins

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Administración Federal de Ingresos Públicos - Resolución General No. 4230 (23 April 2018)


Updated list of "criterion values" (valores criterio de carácter preventivo) for imports of yarn of polypropylene, single, untwisted or with a twist not exceeding 50 turns per m; woven fabrics obtained from strip or the like; flexible intermediate bulk containers of man-made textile materials; sacks (bags) of polyethylene or polypropylene strip or the like (NCM 5402.48.00; 5407.20.00; 6305.32.00; 6305.33.90), from specific origins

Permanent Delegation of Argentina to the WTO (28 May 2018) and Administración Federal de Ingresos Públicos - Resolución General No. 4231 (23 April 2018)


Brazil Elimination of the temporary reduction of import tariffs (to 2%) on certain isocyanates (NCM 2929.10.30), under an import quota of 1,000 tonnes (originally effective 23 January 2017 to 22 January 2018)

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO (25 May 2018) and Camex Resolution No. 94/2017 (13 December 2017)

Eliminated on 13 December 2017




- 100 -


Increase of import tariffs (from 2% to 14%) on industrial fatty alcohols (láurico) (NCM 3823.70.20) and ácido caprílico (NCM 3823.19.10); (from zero to 14%) on sinkers, needles and other articles used in forming stitches (NCM 8448.51.10) (effective 1 January 2018); (from 2% to 12%) on certain acyclic monoamines and their derivatives (NCM 2921.19.94) (effective 2 March 2018); and (to 25%) on onions and shallots (NCM 0703.10.19) (effective 22 December 2017 to 31 December 2018)

Permanent Delegation of Brazil to the WTO (25 May 2018), and Camex Resolution Nos. 54/2017 (5 July 2017) 95/2017 (19 December 2017), 98/2017 (21 December 2017) and 11/2018 (28 February 2018)


China The tariff reduction obligation for 128 items imported from the United States was suspended on 2 April 2018, and the tariff was hereafter imposed on the basis of the current tariff rate (15% on edible fruits and nuts; wine of fresh grapes; undenatured ethyl alcohol; ginseng roots; iron or steel seamless tubes, pipes and hollow profiles; and 25% on pork products; and aluminium waste and scrap)



Decrease of VAT rebate rates (from 17% to 16% and from 11% to 10%) on exports of certain products


Effective 1 May 2018

India Increase of import tariffs (to 50%) on peas (pisum sativum) (HS 0713.10.00) (effective 8 November 2017) and (to 45%) on soya beans, whether or not broken (HS 1201.10.00; 1201.90.00) (effective 17 November 2017)

Notification Nos. 84/2017-Customs - Ministry of Finance (8 November 2017) and 88/2017-Customs - Ministry of Finance (17 November 2017)


Increase of import tariffs (from 30% to 40%) on chickpeas (garbanzos) (HS 0713.20.00) (effective 6 February 2018). On 1 March 2018, further increase of import tariffs (from 40% to 60%)

Notification Nos. 25/2018-Customs (6 February 2018) and 28/2018-Customs (1 March 2018)- Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue)


On 6 February 2018, further increase of import tariffs (from 50% to 100%) on raw sugar and refined or white sugar (raw sugar if imported by bulk consumer) (HS 1701). On 20 March 2018, import tariffs eliminated

Notification Nos. 24/2018-Customs (6 February 2018) and 30/2018 (20 March 2018) - Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue)

Increase of import tariffs (from 10% to 15%) on motor cycles (including mopeds) and cycles fitted

with an auxiliary motor, with or without side cars, and side cars, new, which have not been registered anywhere prior to importation - (1) as a completely knocked down (CKD) kit containing all the necessary components, parts or sub-assemblies for assembling a complete vehicle with: (a) engine, gearbox and transmission mechanism not in a pre-assembled condition (HS 8711)

Notification No. 26/2018-Customs - Ministry of Finance

(Department of Revenue) (12 February 2018)


Increase of import tariffs (from 10% to 15%) on certain parts, sub-parts or accessories of cellular mobile phones (e.g. heat dissipation sticker; battery cover; sticker-battery slot; protective film for main lens; Mylar for LDC FPC; film-front flash (HS 3919.90.90); battery cover; front cover; front cover (with zinc casting); middle cover; back cover; main lens; camera lens (HS 3920.99.99); PU case; sealing gasket (HS 3926.90.91), sealing gaskets/cases from PE, PP, EPS, PC and all other individual polymers or combination/combination of polymers; SIM sockets/other mechanical items (plastic); conductive cloth; LCD conductive foam; LCD foam; and BT foam (HS 3926.90.99)



- 101 -


Increase of import tariffs (from 10% to 20%) on kites (HS 4823.90.90); (from 5% to 7.5%) on refractory bricks, blocks, tiles and similar refractory ceramic constructional goods (HS 6902); and on other refractory ceramic goods (e.g. retorts, crucibles, muffles, nozzles, plugs, supports, cupels, tubes, pipes, sheaths and rods) other than those of siliceous fossil metals or of similar siliceous earths (HS 6903); (from zero to 5%) on preform of silica for use in the manufacture of telecommunication garde optical fibres or optical fibre cables (HS Chapter 70); (from 7.5%-10% to 15%) on USB cables of cellular mobile phones (HS 8544) and on LCD/LED/OLED panels of television and certain parts (HS 8529); and (from 30% to 50%) on certain food preparations (excluding compound alcoholic preparations of a kind used for the manufacture of beverages, of an alcoholic strength exceeding 0.5% by volume, determined at a temperature of 20° centigrade) (HS 2106.90)



Increase of import tariffs (from zero to 10%) on 11 specified parts used in the manufacture of liquid crystal display and light emitting diode TV panels of HS 8529 (e.g. open cell (15.6'' and above), plate diffuser, film diffuser, reflector sheet, film-top, film-middle, film-bottom, bar led, bezel, back cover sheet, and black light unit modules (HS 8529); and on cushions/gaskets of liquid crystal display and light emiting diode TV panels (HS 4016)



Increase of import tariffs (from 10% to 20%) on footwear (HS 6401; 6402; 6403; 6404; 6405) and on certain toys, games and sport requisites (HS 9503; 9504; 9505.90.10; 9506; 9507; 9508); and (from 10% to 15%) on certain footwear with uppers of leather or composition leather, and with uppers of textiles materials (HS 6406); on key pads, and GSM antennas of any technology (HS 8517.70.90); on certain clocks and watches (HS 9101; 9102; 9103; 9105); on microphone rubber cases, sensor rubber cases, sealing gaskets, and silicone for use in the manufacture of cellular mobile phones (HS 4016.99.90); and on truck and

bus radial tyres (HS 4011.20.10); and (from 15% to 20%) on cellular mobile phones (HS 8517.12.10; 8517.12.90)

Indian Budget 2018-19, Finance Bill 2018, Clause 101(a) (14 March 2018)

Effective February 2018

Increase of import tariffs (from 10% to 15%) on certain parts and accessories for cellular mobile phones: screws (HS 7318.15.00); SIM sockets/other mechanical items (metal) (HS 7326.90.99); chargers or adapters (HS 8504.40 except HS 8504.40.21); cells or batteries (HS 8506 except HS 8506.90.00); battery packs (other than lithium-ion batteries) (HS 8507 except 8507.90); microphones, wired headsets and receivers (HS 8518); and side key (HS 8538.90.00); and (from 10% to 20%) on lithium-ion batteries (8507.60.00) and wrist wearable devices "smart watches" (HS 8517.62.90)



- 102 -


Increase of import tariffs (from 7.5% to 15%) on spark ignition engines and compression ignition engines (HS 8407; 8408) of motor vehicles falling under HS 8702; 8703; 8704; 8711; on parts suitable for use (HS 8409) principally with the engines of HS 8407; 8408, of a kind used in motor vehicles falling under HS 8702; 8704, motor cars falling under HS 8703, or motor cycles falling under HS 8711; on crank shafts (HS 8483.10.91; 8483.10.92) for engines falling under HS 8407 and 8408 and used in motor vehicles falling under HS 8702; 8703; 8704; 8711; and on electrical ignition or starting equipment and cut-outs (HS 8511) of motor vehicles falling under HS 8702; 8703; 8704; 8711



Elimination of the exemption of customs duties on printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) and moulded plastics for the manufacture of chargers or adapters of cellular mobile phones. Basic customs tariff (BCD) set at 10%



Imposition of "Social Welfare Surcharge" (10%) on imported goods

Permanent Delegation of India to the WTO (5 June 2018)


Imposition of minimum import price "MIP" on peppers resulting in an import ban on imports if their c.i.f. MIP is below Rs 500/kg (imports with a c.i.f. MIP of Rs 500/kg or above are free) (HS 0904)

Permanent Delegation of India to the WTO (9 May 2018) and Notification No. 53/2015-2020, Ministry of Commerce and Industry - Directorate General of Foreign Trade (21 March 2018)


Import ban on seal skins (HS Chapters 41; 42; 43) Permanent Delegation of India to the WTO (9 May 2018) and Notification No. 59/2015-2020, Ministry of Commerce and Industry - Directorate General of Foreign Trade (28 March 2018)


Increase of tariff (from zero to 10%) on camera modules for use in the manufacture of cellular mobile phones; connectors for use in manufacture of cellular mobile phones; and populated, loaded or stuffed printed circuit boards (HS 8517; 8525;

8529)

Notification Nos. 36/2018 and 37/2018 - Customs (2 April 2018) - Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue)


Increase of import tariffs (from 30% to 40%) on whey and modified whey, whether or not concentrated or containing added sugar or other sweetening matter (HS 0404) (whey, concentrated, evaporated or condensed, liquid or semi-solid exempted)

Notification Nos. 43/2018-Customs and 44/2018-Customs (10 April 2018)- Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue)


Indonesia Imposition of import tariffs on certain digital goods Permanent Delegation of

Indonesia to the WTO (25 April 2018)

Mexico Further extension of the temporary increase of import tariffs (from zero to 15%) on 97 iron and steel tariff lines (HS Chapter 72) (originally implemented on 7 October 2015 for 180 days, extended on 4 April 2016 for an additional period of 180 days, and extended again on 6 April 2017 for 180 days)

Permanent Delegation of Mexico to the WTO (30 May 2018); Diario Oficial de la Federación (Official Journal), 17 October 2017; and WTO document WT/TPR/OV/20, 16 November 2017

On 17 October 2017, the measure was again extended for 180 days. On 16 April 2018, the measure was terminated

Establishment of a list of petroleum and oil products (HS 2709; 2710; 2711) subject to mandatory prior import authorization by the Ministry of Energy



Establishment of a list of petroleum and oil products (HS 2709; 2710; 2711) subject to mandatory prior export authorization by the Ministry of Energy



- 103 -


Russian Federation Government Resolution No. 1469 established restrictions and conditions of access of bare metal stents for coronary arteries, stents for coronary arteries, releasing drugs, balloon standard catheters for coronary angioplasty, and aspirating catheters for embolectomies, originating from foreign states, for the purpose of procurement for state and municipal needs


Effective 4 December 2017 to 1 July 2018

Introduction of temporary export duties (from zero to 7.5%) on waste and scrap of tungsten (wolfram) and waste and scrap of cermets (HS 8101.97.00; 8113.00.40)


Effective 30 December 2017 to 30 December 2018

Russian Federation (for Eurasian Economic Union) Temporary increase of import tariffs (from zero to 5%) on injection-moulding machines with a clamping force of not more than 2,200 tonnes (22,000 kN) and an injection volume of not more than 28,200 kN (HS 8477.10.00)


Effective 15 December 2017 to 15 December 2019

Elimination of the temporary reduction of import tariffs (from 13% to 5%) on Brussels sprouts (HS 0704); and (from 5% to zero) on nuts, dates, and dried grapes (HS 0802; 0804; 0806) (originally implemented on 22 April 2016)



South Africa (for SACU - Southern African Customs Union - Botswana, Eswatini, Lesotho, Namibia and South Africa)

Increase of import tariffs (from 5% to 15%) on certain aluminium bars, rods and profiles (HS 7604.21.15; 7604.29.15; 7604.29.65) (effective 17 November 2017); and (from zero to 20%) on pre-fabricated buildings of iron or steel (HS 9406.90.10; 9406.90.90) (effective 17 November 2017) and self adhesive tapes (HS 3919.10.41; 3919.10.43) (effective 29 December 2017). Imports from the European Union, EFTA and Southern African Development Community (SADC) members exempted

Permanent Delegation of South Africa to the WTO (28 May 2018), International Trade Administration Commission Notice Nos. R. 1282 and R. 1283 - Government Gazette No. 41257 (17 November 2017) and R. 150 - Government Gazette No. 41363 (29 December 2017)


Increase of import excise duties (from 5% to 7%) on certain perfumes and toilet waters; beauty or make up preparations; and certain motorcycles; (from 7% to 9%) on machines for the reception, conversion

and transmission of voice, image or other data; certain perfumes and toilet waters; fireworks; certain furskin articles; machinery and mechanical appliances; electrical machinery and equipment; water scooters; and arms, toys and games (HS 8517.62.20; 8517.69.10; 3303.00.90; 3304.10.90; 3304.20.90; 3304.30.90; 3304.91.90; 3304.99.90; 3604.10; 4303.10; 4304.00.10; 8415.10.10; 8415.10.20; 8415.81.10; 8415.82.10; 8415.83.10; 8415.90.05; 8517.11; 8517.12.10; 8518.21; 8518.22; 8518.29; 8518.40; 8518.50; 8519.81.90; 8519.89.90; 8521.90.90; 8525.80.90; 8527.13.10; 8527.19.10; 8527.21; 8527.29; 8527.91.10; 8527.92.10; 8527.99.10; 8528.49.10; 8528.49.90; 8528.52.20; 8528.52.90; 8528.59.15; 8528.59.90; 8528.69.90; 8528.71.10; 8528.71.90; 8528.72.20; 8528.72.50; 8528.72.90; 8528.73.20; 8528.73.50; 8528.73.90; 8711.20.90; 8711.30; 8711.40; 8711.50; 8711.90.20; 8711.90.30; 8903.99.10; 9302.00.10; 9302.00.25; 9302.00.29; 9302.00.39; 9303.10; 9303.20.11; 9303.20.12; 9303.20.13; 9303.20.20; 9303.30.10; 9303.30.20; 9303.30.90; 9304.00.20; 9504.30.10; 9504.50.10; 9506.32); and (from 25% to 30%) on motor vehicles (HS Chapter 87)

Permanent Delegation of South Africa to the WTO (28 May 2018) and International Trade

Administration Commission Notice No. R. 347 - Government Gazette No. 41515 (23 March 2018)


- 104 -


Turkey Increase of import tariffs on certain products; (to 5%) on paracetamol; (from 2.3% to 20%) on hair clippers and other articles of base metal cutlery; (to 25%) on coated electrodes of base metals such as nickel and others for electric arc-welding; (to 14.9%) on other kind of centrifugal pumps; (from 6% to 7.6%) on works trucks fitted with mechanic lifting equipment; (to 20%) on pressure-reducing valves; valves for oleohydraulic or pneumatic transmission; and check "non return" valves composed of cast iron or steel; safety or relief valves; appliances for pipes, boiler shells, tanks, vats or the like (excluding pressure-reducing valves, valves for the control of pneumatic power transmission, check "non-return" valves and safety or relief valves) and parts of valves; (to 9.3%) on AC motors, single-phase, of an output > 7,5 kW; (to 11.3%) and other AC motors, multi-phase, of an output > 750 W but <= 75 kW; (to 16.8%) on certain single axle tractors' pedestrian controlled agricultural tractors and similar tractors for industry (excluding tractor units for articulated lorries); (to 13.3%) on hydraulic steering boxes; (to 20%) on syringes, with or without needles, used in medical, surgical, dental or veterinary sciences; (to 23.4%) on artists' brushes and writing brushes; (to 20%) on vacuum flasks and other vacuum vessels, and parts thereof (excluding glass inners) (HS Chapters 82; 83; 84; 85; 87; 90; 96)



United States of America Imposition of an additional 25% ad valorem rate of duty on certain steel articles (HS Chapters 72 and 73) for national security reasons. See Presidential Proclamations for country specific exemptions

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Presidential Proclamation on adjusting imports of steel into the United States (8, 22 March 2018, 30 April 2018, 31 May 2018). Viewed at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-

actions/presidential-proclamation-adjusting-imports-steel-united-states/ and https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-proclamation-adjusting-imports-steel-united-states-2/ and https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-proclamation-adjusting-imports-steel-united-states-3/ and https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-proclamation-adjusting-imports-steel-united-states-4/

Effective 23 March 2018. See Presidential Proclamations for country specific exemptions.

- 105 -


Imposition of an additional 10% ad valorem rate of duty on certain aluminium articles (e.g. unwrought aluminium; aluminium bars, rods, and profiles; aluminium wire; aluminium plate, sheet, strip, and foil (flat-rolled products) (HS Chapter 76); aluminium tubes and pipe fittings; and aluminium castings and forgings) for national security reasons. See Presidential Proclamations for country specific exemptions

Permanent Delegation of the United States to the WTO (4 June 2018) and Presidential Proclamation on adjusting imports of aluminium into the United States (8 and 22 March 2018, 30 April 2018, 31 May 2018). Viewed at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-proclamation-adjusting-imports-aluminum-united-states/ and https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-proclamation-adjusting-imports-aluminum-united-states-2/ and https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-proclamation-adjusting-imports-aluminum-united-states-3/ and https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-proclamation-adjusting-imports-aluminum-united-states-4/

Effective 23 March 2018. See Presidential Proclamations for country specific exemptions

Recorded, but non-confirmed information3


Russian Federation Imposition of certain counter-restrictive measures to maintain the

volume of metallurgical production

World Service

Wire (13 April 2018)

Turkey Increase of import tariffs on plywood, veneered panels and similar laminated wood (HS 4412)

Press reports referring to Official Gazette 2018/11481

Effective March 2018

3 This Section includes information which has been obtained from public sources but has not yet been

confirmed by the delegation concerned.

- 106 -

ANNEX 4

MEASURES AFFECTING TRADE IN SERVICES1

(Mid-October 2017 to Mid-May 2018)

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral

classification Source Date

Verified by

Member

MEASURES AFFECTING VARIOUS SECTORS Argentina

The Government adopted a series of measures simplifying administrative procedures in order to encourage private investment. Among other changes, the Decree eliminates the Registro Industrial de la Nación, which required the registration of all companies, a process lasting eight months.

Mode 3 All sectors Decreto 27/2018 Viewed at: https://www.boletinoficial.gob.ar/#!DetalleNormaBusquedaAvanzada/177429/20180111

Published in the Official Gazette on 11 January 2018

YES

China The State Council published a new Circular to facilitate implementation of reforms within the country's free trade zones. Changes include, but are not limited to, the following:

Mode 3 Various sectors Decision on Temporarily Adjusting Relevant Administrative Regulations, State Council Documents and Department Rules Approved by the State Council within FTZs (State Council Circular No. 57, 2017)

9 January 2018 YES

- foreign-invested enterprises are allowed to engage in printing activities; - foreign investors are allowed to establish wholly foreign-owned air transport sales agencies and wholly foreign-owned enterprises to operate freight storage, ground services, in-flight meals and car parks;

Viewed at: http://www.china-briefing.com/news/2018/02/08/china-eases-foreign-investment-restrictions-free-trade-zones.html

1 The inclusion of any measure in this Annex implies no judgement by the WTO Secretariat on whether or not such measure, or its intent, is protectionist in

nature. Moreover, nothing in the Annex implies any judgement, either direct or indirect, on the consistency of any measure referred to with the provisions of any WTO agreement.

https://www.boletinoficial.gob.ar/#!DetalleNormaBusquedaAvanzada/177429/20180111

https://www.boletinoficial.gob.ar/#!DetalleNormaBusquedaAvanzada/177429/20180111

http://www.china-briefing.com/news/2018/02/08/china-eases-foreign-investment-restrictions-free-trade-zones.html




- 107 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

- wholly foreign-owned enterprises are allowed to operate entertainment venues; - joint Chinese-foreign travel agencies that meet required conditions are permitted to provide travel services abroad (except for travel in Chinese Taipei); - with respect to direct selling, the requirement that foreign investors have at least three years of prior experience is suspended; - foreign investors are permitted to establish wholly foreign-owned enterprises to construct and operate petrol stations; - foreign investors are permitted to establish wholly foreign-owned enterprises to undertake international shipping, international ship management, international marine cargo handling, and international maritime container freight station and container yard businesses; - foreign investors are allowed to establish joint equity ventures or cooperative joint ventures to undertake international shipping agency business, with the proportion of foreign shareholding relaxed to 51%.

- 108 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

India The Union Cabinet approved changes to India's FDI policy. Among the modifications, FDI in single brand retailing is permitted up to 100% under the automatic route. Previously, FDI above 49% required government approval. Under the new measure, a foreign single-brand retailer can, for the first five years, satisfy the obligation to source 30% of its purchases from India through incremental sourcing of goods from India by its foreign operations.2 After five years, the retailer will be required to meet the 30% sourcing norms directly from its Indian operation on an annual basis. Further, foreign airlines are allowed to invest up to 49% in Air India under the approval route, subject to certain conditions. Amendments also clarify that real estate broker services do not constitute real estate business and are therefore eligible for 100% FDI under the automatic route.

Mode 3 Various sectors

Amendments to the Consolidated FDI Policy Viewed at:

http://dipp.nic.in/policies-rules-and-

acts/press-notes-fdi-circular

Approved on 10 January 2018

YES

Indonesia The new regulation provides that only Indonesian-flagged vessels can be used for exports of coal and crude palm oil, and for imports of rice. Further, such transport can only be insured by national insurance companies. Foreign vessels and insurance services may be used if domestic supply is insufficient.

Modes 1-3 Maritime transport services and insurance services

Trade Ministry Regulation No. 82/2017 on the Terms of Use of National Shipping and Insurance Companies for the Export and Import of Certain Goods


YES

2 For this purpose, incremental sourcing has been defined to mean the increase in terms of value of such global sourcing from India for that single brand in a particular

financial year from India over the preceding financial year, by the non-resident entities undertaking single brand retail trading, either directly or through their group companies.

http://dipp.nic.in/policies-rules-and-acts/press-notes-fdi-circular

http://dipp.nic.in/policies-rules-and-acts/press-notes-fdi-circular

- 109 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

Italy The new measure extends the Government's "golden powers", which allow blocking and imposing conditions on takeovers by non-EU companies, to high technology sectors in cases of threats to

Mode 3 Various sectors Legislative Decree no. 148/2017 Viewed at: http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2017/12/05/17A08254/SG

Approved on 4 December 2017

YES

national security and public order, subject to prior adoption of administrative regulations. Sectors concerned can include, if individuated by a regulation: critical or sensitive infrastructure such as storage and management of data; critical technology, including robotics and artificial intelligence; security of supply of critical inputs; access to sensitive information or ability to control sensitive information.

Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of The Saudi Arabian General Investment Authority (SAGIA) extended the duration of foreign investment licences to five years, up from one year. The licensing period continues to be renewable.

Mode 3 All sectors Viewed at: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=fc92f8a2-23c0-4e6d-a115-58324ede1d2c


YES

TELECOMMUNICATIONS/ICT/AUDIOVISUAL SERVICES China

As of 1 April 2018, the use of unlicensed virtual private networks (VPNs) is banned. In January 2017, a Circular required all VPN providers to be licensed by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT). Providers were given up to 31 March to comply, after which unlicensed services would be blocked. The Circular requires pre-approval for cross-border business operations intending to set up their own or leasing private leased circuits (PLCs), including VPNs. If approved, PLCs can only be used to handle internal official business and not to connect onshore and offshore data centres or business platforms to carry out telecom business operations.

Modes 1-3 Telecommunication services

Circular on Cleaning Up and Regulating the Internet Access Service Market (Circular 32), issued on 17 January 2017. Viewed at: https://www.techradar.com/news/china-will-block-all-non-approved-vpns-from-next-month https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9716093a-89af-46a3-b72b-84023241a8f7


http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2017/12/05/17A08254/SG

http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2017/12/05/17A08254/SG

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=fc92f8a2-23c0-4e6d-a115-58324ede1d2c

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=fc92f8a2-23c0-4e6d-a115-58324ede1d2c

https://www.techradar.com/news/china-will-block-all-non-approved-vpns-from-next-month

https://www.techradar.com/news/china-will-block-all-non-approved-vpns-from-next-month

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9716093a-89af-46a3-b72b-84023241a8f7

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9716093a-89af-46a3-b72b-84023241a8f7

- 110 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

European Union The new General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which entered into force on 25 May 2018, overhauls the EU data protection regime by strengthening data subject rights and imposing new requirements on organizations that process personal data.

Modes 1-3 Internet and other network enabled services

Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 Viewed at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32016R0679

Effective 25 May 2018

YES

The European Commission announced that preliminary agreement was reached with the European Parliament and Council on the main elements of revised audiovisual rules that will apply to broadcasters, video-on-demand and video-sharing platforms. Revisions include: - a requirement that on-demand catalogues contain at least a 30% share of European content; - the possibility for member States to impose financial contributions (direct investments in content or levies paid to a national fund) upon media service providers to contribute to the development of European productions; - alignment of the procedures for exceptions to the country-of-origin principle for on-demand service providers, as for TV broadcasters; - increased protection of minors and rules against hate speech for TV and on-demand services; - extension of certain audiovisual commercial communications rules to video sharing platforms; - extension of the scope to cover video-sharing platforms and the obligation for them to put in place measures to protect the general public, including minors, from certain content; - new rules to ensure that audiovisual regulators are legally distinct from the Government, and are functionally independent from the Government and any other public or private body; - increased flexibility regarding the airing of TV advertising.

Modes 1-3 Audiovisual services

Viewed at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-3567_en.htm

26 April 2018 YES

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32016R0679

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32016R0679

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-3567_en.htm

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-3567_en.htm

- 111 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

France French telecoms regulator Arcep adopted decisions aimed at ensuring greater competition in the fixed markets for the period 2017-20, including by allowing alternative operators better access to Orange France's infrastructure.

Mode 3 Telecommunication services

Decision No. 2017-1347 Decision No. 2017-1348 Decision No. 2017-1349 Decision No. 2017-1488 Viewed at: https://www.arcep.fr/uploads/tx_gsavis/17-1347.pdf https://www.arcep.fr/uploads/tx_gsavis/17-1348.pdf https://www.arcep.fr/uploads/tx_gsavis/17-1349.pdf https://www.arcep.fr/uploads/tx_gsavis/17-1488.pdf


YES

Italy The Government adopted new measures regulating the audiovisual sector, including increased quotas for Italian and EU content. The overall quota for the broadcasting of EU works will increase from 50% to 53% in 2019, to 56% in 2020, and 60% in 2021. For public broadcasters, at least half of that quota has to be used for works of Italian original expression, and at least one third in the case of private broadcasters. The new rules also set out the minimum number of works of Italian original expression to be broadcast during prime time hours, and require additional investment by broadcasters in works of Italian original expression and European productions from independent producers. The rules further lay down specific quotas (30%) for European works and investment obligations for on-demand services.

Modes 1-3 Audiovisual services

Legislative Decree Nos. 202 on Provisions on Employment in the Film and Audiovisual Sector; 203 on Reform of Legislation on the Protection of Minors in the Film and Audiovisual Sector, and 204 on Reform of Legislation on the Promotion of European and Italian Works by Providers of Film and Audiovisual Works. Viewed at: http://www.medialaws.eu/three-new-pieces-of-legislation-implementing-franceschini-act-on-cinema-and-audio-visual-media-services/


YES

https://www.arcep.fr/uploads/tx_gsavis/17-1347.pdf








http://www.medialaws.eu/three-new-pieces-of-legislation-implementing-franceschini-act-on-cinema-and-audio-visual-media-services/



- 112 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

Russian Federation The Government introduced new rules for owners of electronic messenger services. Owners have to register with the national regulator and are required to maintain certain information on local servers. They are also required to identify users through mobile phone numbers, and to store this information in the Russian Federation. Electronic messenger services are defined in the law as any technology or software designed or used to exchange electronic messages among users.

Modes 1-3 Electronic messaging services

Federal Law of 29 July 2017 No. 241-FZ On Amendments to Articles 10.1 and 15.4 of the Federal Law of 27 July 2006 No. 149-FZ On Information, Information Technologies and Data Protection (the 'Messengers Law') Viewed at: http://www.gorodissky.com/publications/articles/russia-further-regulates-instant-messaging-services-providers/ https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=6d53e547-d732-4314-9b65-c9508b093263


A new measure requires operators of virtual private networks (VPNs) and similar technologies to prevent Russian users from accessing websites and other resources that have been blocked by Russian authorities.

Modes 1-3 Virtual private network services

Law on Amendments to IT Law No.276-FZ, dated July 29, 2017 (the "Law on Amendments") Viewed at: https://themoscowtimes.com/news/russian-law-banning-anonymous-online-surfing-comes-into-effect-59434


Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of The Government introduced a new technology- and service-neutral licensing regime. The "Facilities Based Unified License" allows a holder to provide a range of fixed, mobile, data and other services and networks, using any type of communications infrastructure and technology capable of delivering the desired service.


CITC Decisions 337/1438, 336/1438, 335/1438; Decision by Minister of Communications and Information Technology Viewed at: http://www.citc.gov.sa/en/RulesandSystems/RegulatoryDocuments/Licenses/LicensingRegulatoryFrameworks/Documents/PL-SP-020-E-Licensing.pdf http://www.citc.gov.sa/en/RulesandSystems/RegulatoryDocuments/Licenses/LicensingRegulatoryFrameworks/Documents/PL-SP-019-E-Licensing.pdf http://www.citc.gov.sa/ar/Decisionsoffers/Decisions/Pages/335-1438.aspx http://www.citc.gov.sa/ar/MediaCenter/PressReleases/Pages/2017092402.aspx

November 2017- January 2018

YES

http://www.gorodissky.com/publications/articles/russia-further-regulates-instant-messaging-services-providers/



https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=6d53e547-d732-4314-9b65-c9508b093263

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=6d53e547-d732-4314-9b65-c9508b093263

https://themoscowtimes.com/news/russian-law-banning-anonymous-online-surfing-comes-into-effect-59434



http://www.citc.gov.sa/en/RulesandSystems/RegulatoryDocuments/Licenses/LicensingRegulatoryFrameworks/Documents/PL-SP-020-E-Licensing.pdf








http://www.citc.gov.sa/ar/Decisionsoffers/Decisions/Pages/335-1438.aspx

http://www.citc.gov.sa/ar/Decisionsoffers/Decisions/Pages/335-1438.aspx

http://www.citc.gov.sa/ar/MediaCenter/PressReleases/Pages/2017092402.aspx

http://www.citc.gov.sa/ar/MediaCenter/PressReleases/Pages/2017092402.aspx

- 113 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

The Government approved licensing regulations for cinemas, lifting the long-standing prohibition on this activity.

Mode 3 Audiovisual services

Viewed at: http://www.gcam.gov.sa/ar/MediaCenter/News/Pages/default.aspx


YES

South Africa A new measure adopted by Parliament gives the Film and Publications Board (FPB) the regulatory power to monitor and classify online content, including online videos, streaming services, and social media. The Bill has been transmitted to the National Council of Provinces for approval, before the President can sign it into law.

Modes 1-3

Online content Films and Publications Amendment Bill Viewed at: https://altadvisory.africa/2018/03/07/south-africas-national-assembly-passes-the-films-and-publications-amendment-bill/

Adopted by the National Assembly on 6 March 2018.

YES

Turkey The new measure requires media service suppliers to obtain a broadcasting licence, and platform operators to obtain an authorization for transmission from Turkey's Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK) in order to provide radio, television and on-demand broadcasting services on the internet. Lack of a valid licence can result in removal of the content or blocking of access.

Modes 1-3 Internet broadcasting services

Addition of Article 29/A to Law No. 6112 on the Establishment of Radio and Television Enterprises and Media Services Viewed at: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9cdac9b6-6923-4bf3-9d47-3b9fbaa6f58f http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.6112.pdf


YES

The measure applies to media service suppliers and platform operators who wish to broadcast only via Internet. If the content is provided from abroad or the service supplier is based abroad, the licence requirement applies in the following cases: a) service providers or platforms that broadcast in violation of international agreements and the Broadcasting Law; b) broadcasters of internet content in Turkish and aimed at persons in Turkey; c) broadcasting organizations that do not broadcast in Turkish but include commercial communications aimed at persons in Turkey.

http://www.gcam.gov.sa/ar/MediaCenter/News/Pages/default.aspx

http://www.gcam.gov.sa/ar/MediaCenter/News/Pages/default.aspx

https://altadvisory.africa/2018/03/07/south-africas-national-assembly-passes-the-films-and-publications-amendment-bill/



https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9cdac9b6-6923-4bf3-9d47-3b9fbaa6f58f

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9cdac9b6-6923-4bf3-9d47-3b9fbaa6f58f

http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.6112.pdf

http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.6112.pdf

- 114 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

United Kingdom Ofcom published a Statement containing a set of measures aimed at increasing investment in full-fibre broadband networks and lowering the upfront building costs. The main measures cover competitors' access to BT's infrastructure, price deregulation of Openreach's wholesale superfast broadband products, price cuts for entry-level superfast broadband service, and stricter requirements on Openreach to fix faults and install new broadband lines.


Quality of service for WLR, MPF and GEA: Statement on quality of service remedies Viewed at: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/112210/statement-qos-wlr-mpf-gea2.pdf


United States The FCC released a ruling on Restoring Internet Freedom, thereby repealing net neutrality rules previously put into place. As part of the means of doing so, the FCC ruling reversed the previous administrations classification of internet as a common carrier service.


Declaratory Ruling, Report and Order, and Order (FCC 17-166) Viewed at: https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-17-166A1.pdf

4 January 2018

FINANCIAL SERVICES China

The measure removes various approval requirements and replaces them with reporting requirements. The services and activities concerned include the following: a) custody services provided to the securities invested funds by locally incorporated foreign-invested banks; b) custody services provided to the overseas wealth management products issued by banks for and on behalf of customers by foreign-invested banks (including the locally incorporated foreign-invested banks and foreign banks' PRC branches); and c) overseas wealth management services issued for and on behalf of customers by foreign-invested banks. The measure also allows locally incorporated foreign-invested banks to establish or invest in CBRC regulated banking financial institutions.

Mode 3 Banking services Decision of the China Banking Regulatory Commission on Revising the China Banking Regulatory Commission Implementing Measures for the Administrative Licensing Items of Foreign-funded Banks (Order No. 3 [2018] of the China Banking Regulatory Commission)


YES

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/112210/statement-qos-wlr-mpf-gea2.pdf

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/112210/statement-qos-wlr-mpf-gea2.pdf

https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-17-166A1.pdf

https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-17-166A1.pdf

- 115 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

Finally, the measure unifies to a great extent the market access standards for foreign-invested banks and domestic-funded banks, by 1) consolidating the various approval procedures for the establishment and opening of sub-branches into one approval for business commencement; 2) optimizing the conditions raising and issuing debt and capital supplement instruments by locally incorporated foreign-invested banks; and 3) simplifying the qualification review procedures for the authorization of executives.

Crude oil futures were listed for trade on the subsidiary of the Shanghai Futures Exchange, Shanghai International Energy Exchange Co., Ltd., on 26 March 2018. Overseas traders and overseas brokerage agencies can legally participate in crude oil futures trading.

Mode 1 Financial services Interim Measures on Administration of Trading of Specific kind of Futures in China by Overseas Traders and Overseas Brokers (Order No. 116 of China Securities Regulatory Commission)

26 March 2018

- 116 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

The measure lifts market access restrictions on non-banking payment institutions. Foreign suppliers wishing to provide electronic payment services for domestic transactions and cross-border transactions must obtain a payment service licence and establish foreign-invested enterprises within the territory of the People's Republic of China. The foreign-invested payment institution shall be capable of independently completing the payment business within the territory of China. The storage, processing and analysis of personal information and financial information collected and generated by foreign investment payment agencies in China must be conducted within the territory. In order for the information to be transferred overseas, the supplier must comply with the laws and regulations of the relevant regulatory authorities, fulfil corresponding information confidentiality obligations, and obtain the consent of the personal information subject.

Modes 1-3 Banking and other financial services

The Announcement on Matters Concerning Foreign Investment and Payment Institutions. Announcement by People's Bank of China (2018 No. 7)


- 117 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

India The Reserve Bank announced that sub-targets for lending to small and marginal farmers and micro enterprises will be applied to foreign banks with 20 branches or more. The sub-target of 8% of Adjusted Net Bank Credit (ANBC) or Credit Equivalent Amount of Off-Balance Sheet Exposure (CEOBE), whichever is higher, will apply to lending to small and marginal farmers from fiscal year 2018-19. The lending target for micro enterprises will be 7.5% of ANBC or CEOBE, whichever is higher. The new measure also removes the credit caps on MSMEs (Services) under Priority Sector.

Mode 3 Banking services Reserve Bank of India, Statement on Developmental and Regulatory Policies – February 2018 Viewed at: https://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/PressRelease/PDFs/PR2147D452F23A943B4865A3C8C775F9D7EF8D.PDF

Effective from fiscal year 2018-19

YES

The Reserve Bank of India issued a Directive on 6 April 2018 requiring all payment system operators to store data within the country. Operators are given a maximum of six months to comply with the requirement and to submit an audit report certifying compliance.

Modes 1-3 Banking and other financial services

Directive from the Reserve Bank of India issued under Section 10(2) read with Section 18 of Payment and Settlement Systems Act 2007, (Act 51 of 2007). Viewed at: https://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/NotificationUser.aspx?Id=11244&Mode=0

6 April 2018 YES

Indonesia The measure requires domestic retail debit and credit transactions to be processed through switching institutions located in Indonesia and licensed by the Bank of Indonesia. The measure also imposes a 20% foreign equity cap on firms that wish to obtain switching licences to participate in the National Payment Gateway (NPG). Foreign firms that wish to process transactions through the NPG must form partnership agreements with licensed NPG switch institutions and agree to transfer technology as part of these agreements.

Modes 1 and 3

Banking and other financial services

Bank Indonesia Board of Governors Regulation 19/10/PADG/2017 concerning National Payment Gateway

Bank of Indonesia has begun implementation of these measures, requiring Indonesian issuers to begin issuing ATM and/or debit cards with the NPG national logo by 1 January 2018.

https://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/PressRelease/PDFs/PR2147D452F23A943B4865A3C8C775F9D7EF8D.PDF



https://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/NotificationUser.aspx?Id=11244&Mode=0

https://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/NotificationUser.aspx?Id=11244&Mode=0

- 118 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of Foreign investors have been allowed to invest directly in the Parallel Market (NOMU). Foreign investors in NOMU are no longer required to qualify as foreign institutional investors, but have to meet eligibility criteria. NOMU is an alternative equity market with lighter listing requirements than the main market; it is especially used by small and medium-sized companies.

Mode 3 Banking and other financial services

Resolution from the Capital Market Authority (CMA) Board Viewed at: https://cma.org.sa/en/Pages/default.aspx


YES

The Capital Market Authority's Board of Commissioners adopted revised regulations on mergers and acquisitions, new regulations in relation to the establishment and licensing of special purpose entities in the financial service sector, and updated rules for Qualified Foreign Financial Institutions Investment in Listed Securities.

Mode 3 Financial services Merger and Acquisition Regulations; Rules for Special Purposes Entities; Rules for Qualified Foreign Financial Institutions Investment in Listed Securities. Viewed at:

https://cma.org.sa/en/

Effective 23 April 2018; 1 April 2018; 13 January 2018.

YES

South Africa The new Insurance Act introduced regulations on activities of foreign-based insurers. It prohibits such insurers and reinsurers from soliciting business in South Africa on a cross-border basis, except where foreign reinsurers conduct business through a branch established in South Africa.

Modes 1-2

Insurance services Insurance Act 2017 Viewed at: https://www.clydeco.com/insight/article/south-african-insurance-bill-signed-into-law?utm_source=Mondaq&utm_medium=syndication&utm_campaign=View-Original


YES

EDUCATION SERVICES Indonesia

The President of Indonesia has instructed his Cabinet to allow 100% foreign ownership in universities, and to permit foreign institutions to open campuses in the country.

Mode 3 Education services Viewed at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-indonesia-investment-education/indonesia-plans-to-open-university-sector-to-100-percent-foreign-ownership-idUSKCN1HB0T4

Announcement on 4 April 2018

https://cma.org.sa/en/Pages/default.aspx

https://cma.org.sa/en/

https://www.clydeco.com/insight/article/south-african-insurance-bill-signed-into-law?utm_source=Mondaq&utm_medium=syndication&utm_campaign=View-Original




https://www.reuters.com/article/us-indonesia-investment-education/indonesia-plans-to-open-university-sector-to-100-percent-foreign-ownership-idUSKCN1HB0T4




- 119 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

India

The Supreme Court of India rendered a judgment in which it held that foreign law firms cannot set up offices in India or practice in Indian Courts. Foreign law firms or foreign lawyers are not prohibited from

Modes 3-4 Legal Services Supreme Court of India, judgment dated 13 March 2018, Civil Appeal Nos. 7875-7879 of 2015, titled Bar Council of India Vs A.K. Balaji and Ors.

13 March 2018 YES

visiting India for a temporary period in order to provide legal advice regarding foreign law on diverse international legal issues on a 'fly in and fly out' basis if it does not amount to practice including appearances in Courts of India. The Supreme Court also held that foreign lawyers are not barred if the matter is governed by particular rules of an arbitral institution or if the matter otherwise falls under section 32 or 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Even in such cases, the Code of Conduct applicable to the legal profession in India has to be followed.

Viewed at: https://sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2012/13890/13890_2012_Judgement_13-Mar-2018.pdf

SERVICES SUPPLIED THROUGH THE MOVEMENT OF NATURAL PERSONS

Australia On 18 March 2018, the Australian Government replaced the Temporary Work (Skilled) (subclass 457) visa with the new Temporary Skill Shortage (TSS) visa. The TSS visa facilitates the targeted use of overseas workers to address temporary skill shortages, while ensuring that Australian workers get priority. TSS visa holders can work in Australia in their nominated occupation for their approved sponsor under one of three streams: - The short-term stream, underpinned by the Short-Term Skilled Occupations List (STSOL);

Mode 4 All sectors Viewed at: https://www.border.gov.au/Trav/Work/457-abolition-replacement https://www.jobs.gov.au/SkilledMigrationList

18 March 2018 YES

- The medium-term stream, underpinned by the Medium and Long-Term Strategic Skills List (MLTSSL); - The labour agreement stream: labour agreements are developed between the Department and employers where there is a demonstrated need that sits outside the standard TSS visa programme.

https://sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2012/13890/13890_2012_Judgement_13-Mar-2018.pdf

https://sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2012/13890/13890_2012_Judgement_13-Mar-2018.pdf

https://www.border.gov.au/Trav/Work/457-abolition-replacement

https://www.border.gov.au/Trav/Work/457-abolition-replacement

https://www.jobs.gov.au/SkilledMigrationList

- 120 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

Employers in regional areas may nominate overseas workers in the medium-term stream in occupations on the Regional Occupation List (ROL), in addition to occupations on the MLTSSL.

The short-term stream is eligible for stay periods of up to two years and can be renewed on one occasion on-shore, unless an international trade obligation applies. The medium-term stream is eligible for stay periods of up to four years, with no restrictions of on-shore renewals.

The STSOL, MLTSSL, and ROL are subject to regular review by the Department of Jobs and Small Business. The TSS visa is also supported by such measures as: enhanced labour market testing, mandatory police checks, and a two-year work experience requirement.

Brazil The new Migration Law simplifies procedures for the entry and residence of foreigners in Brazil. The Law reorganizes Brazil's visa system into the following categories: visitor visas, temporary visas, and official, diplomatic and courtesy visas.

Mode 4 All sectors Migration Law 13.445 Viewed at: https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/services/people-organisation/publications/assets/pwc-brazil-new-migration-law-to-affect-visas-tax-residence-rules.pdf


YES

https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/services/people-organisation/publications/assets/pwc-brazil-new-migration-law-to-affect-visas-tax-residence-rules.pdf




- 121 -

Measure Mode(s) of

supply Sectoral


Verified by

Member

Visitor visas are applicable to foreigners who do not intend to establish residence in Brazil but carry out tourist, business, transit, artistic or sporting activities. Remunerated activities cannot be performed under this visa category. Initial stays are granted for a maximum of 90 days, with the possibility of extending stays for a further 90 days except for foreigners conducting auditing and consulting, maritime, artistic or sports/athletic activities.

Temporary visas are designed for employment, research, health treatment, study, vacation, summer jobs, family reunion and investment. They are valid for up to two years and can be renewed for an additional two-year period. Foreigners may apply for temporary visas without a formal job offer if they provide evidence of a higher degree diploma or equivalent.

Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of The Ministry of Labour and Social Development introduced a new prohibition on foreign workers in 12 additional sectors: automobile and mobile shops; shops selling home furniture and ready-made office materials; sale outlets of ready-made garments; children's clothes and men's suppliers; watch shops; optical stores; electrical and electronics shops; medical equipment stores; outlets selling car spare parts; building material shops; outlets selling all types of carpets; household utensils shops and pastry shops.

Mode 4 Various sectors Ministerial decision Viewed at: https://www.financialexpress.com/world-news/big-setback-to-indians-saudi-arabia-bans-foreign-workers-in-12-sectors-check-full-list-of-expatriates-affected/1054178/ https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=8a369bc1-b793-42db-9902-93475690a6d4

Will be effective from 11 September 2018, 9 November 2018 and 7 January 2019, depending on the sector.

YES

Employment visas issued for foreign private sector workers in Saudi Arabia are now valid for one year, down from two years.

Mode 4 All sectors Viewed at: http://www.arabianbusiness.com/politics-economics/381916-saudi-expat-work-visas-limited-to-one-year


YES

_______________

https://www.financialexpress.com/world-news/big-setback-to-indians-saudi-arabia-bans-foreign-workers-in-12-sectors-check-full-list-of-expatriates-affected/1054178/




https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=8a369bc1-b793-42db-9902-93475690a6d4

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=8a369bc1-b793-42db-9902-93475690a6d4

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/politics-economics/381916-saudi-expat-work-visas-limited-to-one-year



1

4 July 2018

Nineteenth Report on G20 Investment Measures1

When the global financial crisis broke out in 2008, G20 Leaders committed to resisting protectionism

in all its forms at their 2008 Summit in Washington. At their subsequent summits in London,

Pittsburgh, Toronto, Seoul, Cannes, Los Cabos, St Petersburg, Brisbane, Antalya, Hangzhou and

Hamburg, they reaffirmed this pledge and called on WTO, OECD, and UNCTAD to monitor and

publicly report on their trade and investment policy measures.

The present document is the nineteenth report on investment and investment-related measures made in

response to this call.2 It has been prepared jointly by the OECD and UNCTAD Secretariats and covers

investment policy and investment-related measures taken between 16 October 2017 and 15 May 2018.

I. Development of FDI flows

Global FDI flows decreased by around 20% to USD 1.4 trillion in 2017 compared to 2016.3 Inflows to

developed economies decreased by 37%, largely driven by decreases in the United Kingdom and the

United States from high levels in 2016. Outflows from developed economies decreased only slightly.

In contrast, FDI inflows to developing economies remained close to their 2016 level; FDI outflows

from developing economies decreased 6% as FDI outflows from China declined for the first time in

15 years. The United States remained the largest source of FDI worldwide by a long stretch, followed

1 This report is issued under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD and the Secretary-General of

UNCTAD. It has no legal effect on the rights and obligations of member states of the WTO, OECD, or UNCTAD.

Nothing in this report implies any judgment, either direct or indirect, as to the consistency of any measure referred to in

the report with the provisions of any WTO, OECD, or UNCTAD agreement or any provisions thereof. As its previous

report, this document distinguishes between measures related to foreign direct investment (prepared jointly by OECD

and UNCTAD) and measures related to other international capital flows (prepared solely by OECD). 2 Earlier reports by WTO, OECD and UNCTAD to G20 Leaders are available on the websites of the OECD and

UNCTAD. A summary table of all investment measures taken since 2008 is also available on those websites. 3 The most recent figures are available in OECD, FDI in Figures and UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2018:

Investment and New Industrial Policies, June 2018.

http://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/investment-policy/g20.htm

http://unctad.org/en/Pages/DIAE/G-20/UNCTAD-OECD-reports.aspx

http://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/investment-policy/statistics.htm

http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/wir2018_en.pdf

http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/wir2018_en.pdf

2

by Japan, China, the United Kingdom, Germany and Canada. China, after being a net outward direct

investor for the first time in 2015, became a net inward investor in 2017.

II. Investment policy measures

1. Foreign direct investment-specific measures

In the reporting period, six G20 Members – Australia, Canada, China, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia

– amended policies specific to foreign direct investment. The measures taken show a mixed picture:

On the one hand, several measures liberalised foreign direct investment in certain industries or

promoted foreign direct investment otherwise. On the other hand, some new investment restrictions

were introduced, relating mainly to the acquisition of agricultural land by foreigners, foreign

ownership regulations in financial services companies, and certain limitations for outward foreign

investment. In contrast to findings for most of the earlier reporting periods under this exercise, the

proportion of policy measures that point to greater openness for inward foreign investment has

declined, and measures introduced since 16 October 2017 also include restrictions to outward flows.

A detailed description of the measures is available in Annex 1 of this report.

2. Investment measures related to national security

In the reporting period, three G20 Members introduced new investment policies related to national

security; such policies seek to address potential threats to national security that stem from

international investment.

The three G20 Members that introduced new policies in this area – Australia, China and Italy –

already had mechanisms to manage threats to their national security. The changes that they introduced

in the reporting period concern critical infrastructure; expand the scope of the policies’ application to

additional sectors and newly identified risks and threats associated with advanced technology; or

concern the transfer abroad of intellectual property.

The resurgent interest in investment policies motivated by national security concerns is not limited to

G20 Members, as has been noted in the previous report in this series. Several non-G20 Members have

taken similar policy measures recently (e.g. Latvia, Lithuania), and more policy changes are planned

or considered in both G20 Members (e.g. France, United Kingdom, United States, European Union)

and non-G20 economies (e.g. Netherlands and Norway).

The common trait of new policies in most of these countries is a broadening of the notion of sensitive

sectors, which traditionally focused on defence and infrastructure hardware. Reforms tend to include

advanced and dual use technologies (artificial intelligence, microelectronics and robotics, as for

example included by recent reforms in Germany, Italy, Japan) as well as assets that would grant

access to personal data or intellectual property.

While countries have the right to safeguard their essential security interests, there is a latent risk that

such policies are designed or implemented for purposes that go beyond genuine national security

concerns. Agreed policy disciplines, such as the G20 Guiding Principles for Global Investment

Policymaking4and the Guidelines for Recipient Country Investment Policies relating to National

Security (2009), combined with peer monitoring of policy design and implementation can play an

important role in managing the risk of unwarranted discrimination of foreign investors under the guise

of national security. Greater transparency and respect of internationally agreed corporate governance

principles by certain categories of sensitive investors, such as the OECD Guidelines on Corporate

4 Endorsed in September 2016 at the G20 Leaders Summit in Hangzhou, China.

http://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/investment-policy/18th-Report-on-G20-Investment-Measures.pdf

http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/Upload/Documents/Annex%20III%20G20%20Guiding%20Principles%20for%20Global%20Investment%20Policymaking.pdf

http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/Upload/Documents/Annex%20III%20G20%20Guiding%20Principles%20for%20Global%20Investment%20Policymaking.pdf

http://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/investment-policy/43384486.pdf

http://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/investment-policy/43384486.pdf

http://www.oecd.org/corporate/guidelines-corporate-governance-SOEs.htm

3

Governance of State-Owned Enterprises could further alleviate the national security concerns of host

States and thus enable foreign investment in sensitive areas.5

3. Investment policy measures not specific to FDI6

Investment policy measures not specific to FDI relate to the degree to which economies are integrated

in global financial markets. Four G20 Members – Brazil, China, India, and Saudi Arabia – took

measures that fall in this category in the reporting period. A description of the measures is available in

Annex 2 of this report.

G20 Members have expressed interest in better understanding and articulating the linkages between

capital account openness, growth and resilience. Appropriate disciplines and policy instruments, such

as those included in the OECD Code of Liberalisation of Capital Movements, can help ensure open

and orderly capital movements that are needed to support inclusive growth and sustainable

development.

Adherence to the Code supports the effective implementation of the G20 “Coherent Conclusions”

calling for capital flow management measures to be “transparent, properly communicated, and

targeted to specific risks identified” and for “multilateral surveillance to assess both their individual

impact and aggregate spillover effects”.7 The G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors

have called on all G20 Members that are not already Code Adherents to consider adhering to the

instrument.8 Argentina, Brazil and South Africa have requested to adhere to the instrument, and the

adherence process is underway, with the first peer reviews of applicants’ positions under the Code

commencing in the second half of 2018. Seminars on the Code have also been held in two other non-

Code-adherent G20 Members in the first half of 2018.

The current review of the Code of Liberalisation of Capital Movements – which also covers FDI – has

now entered its decision-making phase, with non-adhering G20 members having importantly

contributed to the diagnostic discussions, testifying of the great value that G20 Members attach to

international cooperation on disciplines in this area.

The OECD will report to the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors on developments

related to the Code at their meeting in July 2018, as requested at their last meeting.

4. International Investment Agreements

During the reporting period, G20 Members concluded eleven new bilateral investment treaties (BITs)9

and seven new “other IIAs”.10

No IIA was terminated in the reporting period. As of 15 May 2018,

5 “State-owned enterprises, international investment and national security: The way forward”, OECD insights, 19 July

2017. 6 This section on “Investment policy measures not specific to FDI” has been prepared by the OECD under the

responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. Annex 2 provides information on the coverage, definitions and

sources of the information contained in this section. 7 G20 Coherent Conclusions for the Management of Capital Flows Drawing on Country Experiences, endorsed by G20

Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, 15 October 2011. 8 Communiqué of the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors Meeting, Baden-Baden, Germany, 17-

18 March 2017, paragraph 4. 9 The BITs between: Argentina and United Arab Emirates (signed on 16 April 2018); Brazil and Ethiopia (signed on 11

April 2018); Brazil and Suriname (signed on 2 May 2018); Turkey and Uzbekistan (signed on 25 October 2017); Turkey

and Chad (signed on 26 December 2017); Turkey and Tunisia (signed on 27 December 2017); Turkey and Serbia (signed

on 31 January 2018); Turkey and Belarus (signed on 14 February 2018); Turkey and Mauritania (signed on 28 February

2018); Turkey and Mali (signed on 2 March 2018); Turkey and Kyrgyzstan (signed on 9 April 2018). Canada also signed

a BIT with Kosovo (United Nations Administrative Region, Security Council resolution 1244 (1999)) on 6 March 2018. 10 “Other IIAs” encompass a variety of international agreements with investment protection, promotion and/or cooperation

provisions – other than BITs. They include free trade agreements (FTAs), regional trade and investment agreements

(RTIAs), comprehensive economic partnership agreements (CEPAs), cooperation agreements, association agreements,

http://www.oecd.org/corporate/guidelines-corporate-governance-SOEs.htm

http://www.oecd.org/investment/codes.htm

http://oecdinsights.org/2017/07/19/state-owned-enterprises-international-investment-and-national-security-the-way-forward/

http://www.bundesfinanzministerium.de/Content/EN/Standardartikel/Topics/Featured/G20/g20-communique.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3

http://www.bundesfinanzministerium.de/Content/EN/Standardartikel/Topics/Featured/G20/g20-communique.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3

4

there were 2,963 BITs and 380 “other IIAs”. Countries from all regions have embarked on reform of

IIAs. Most recently concluded IIAs include a sustainable development orientation, seek to preserve

regulatory space, or alter or omit ISDS mechanisms.11

Data on G20 Members’ IIAs is available in

Annex 3.

III. Overall policy implications

Overall, investment policy measures that G20 Members have taken in the reporting period show a

mixed picture. While some point towards greater openness for foreign investment and the easing of

conditions for international capital flows, especially where enterprise investment is concerned, others

introduce new investment restrictions. The majority of G20 Members has not taken any investment

policy measures at all.

In particular, investment policies related to national security continue to attract significant and

growing attention in and beyond the G20 membership. Shifts in policy design and implementation

appear in certain G20 Members: the scope of transactions that are seen to impair national security is

widening in line with and beyond technological developments, and the perceived mechanisms through

which threats may materialize also evolve and accentuate the national security implications of assets

that provide access to personalised data and intellectual property. While legitimate when confined to

genuine national security concerns, these policies require close monitoring to avoid being used as

disguised restrictions to international investment.

The overall continued openness of G20 Members to international investment is a positive signal and

economies are likely to benefit from such policies, if embodied in a sound regulatory framework.12

The commitment to open, transparent and conducive investment policies is even more valuable and

important at a time when the rules-based system of international economic relations is under strain.

Monitoring and public reporting in this area remain important mechanisms to avoid backsliding on

G20 Leaders’ longstanding pledge to create and maintain open, non-discriminatory, transparent and

predictable conditions for investment.

economic complementation agreements, closer economic partnership arrangements, agreements establishing free trade

areas, and trade and investment framework agreements (TIFAs). Unlike BITs, “other IIAs” may also cover plurilateral

agreements. The “other IIAs” that were concluded in the reporting period are the Comprehensive and Progressive

Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) (signed on 8 March 2018); the FTA between the Republic of Korea

and the Republics of Central America (signed on 21 February 2018); the FTA between Australia and Peru (signed on 12

February 2018); the CEPA between Indonesia and Chile (signed on 15 December 2017); the Comprehensive and

Enhanced Partnership Agreement between the European Union (EU) and Armenia (signed on 24 November 2017); the

Investment Agreement between the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and Hong Kong, China (signed

on 12 November 2017); the FTA between Argentina and Chile (signed on 2 November 2017). 11 UNCTAD IIA Issues Note, “Recent Development in the International Investment Regime” (May 2018). 12 OECD studies estimate that the introduction of reforms further liberalising FDI restrictions in advanced and emerging

economies by about 10% as measured by the OECD FDI Regulatory Restrictiveness Index could increase bilateral FDI

inward stocks by around 2.4%. [OECD (2018), “The Effects of Statutory Restrictions on Foreign Direct Investment: The

Potential Impact of Investment Protectionist or Liberalisation Policies”, OECD Working Paper on International

Investment, forthcoming].

http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/diaepcbinf2018d1_en.pdf

5

Annex 1: Recent investment policy measures related to FDI (16 October 2017 to 15 May 2018) –

Reports on individual economies

Description of Measure Date Source

Argentina

Investment policy

measures

None during reporting period.

Investment

measures relating to national

security


Australia

Investment policy

measures

Some Australian states introduced or increased surcharges

on foreign owners and acquirers of residential real estate. In

the reporting period, changes came into force for New South Wales and South Australia:

• New South Wales, which had introduced surcharges on

stamp duty for foreign acquirers of residential real estate in 2016 and increased land taxes on foreign-owned

residential real estate in 2017 increased the land tax

surcharge to 2% as of 1 January 2018, up from 0.75% in the preceding year; the purchaser duty surcharge has been

increased to 8% through a change in the duties act,

section 104U, effective on 1 July 2017.

• South Australia introduced a 7% stamp duty surcharge on foreign acquirers of residential real estate as of 1 January

2018.

1 January 2018 Notification by Australia to the

OECD dated 19 April 2018;

Regarding New South Wales: “Land tax surcharge”, New South

Wales Revenue website, undated;

Duties Act 1997.

Regarding South Australia: “Foreign Ownership Surcharge”,

Revenue South Australia website, undated.

On 1 February 2018, the Australian government further clarified its policies applicable to acquisitions of agricultural

land by foreigners. The rules now contain an explicit

statement that foreign acquirers are obliged to show that

agricultural land they intend to acquire has been part of a

public sales process and marketed widely to potential

Australian bidders for a minimum of 30 days, and that Australian bidders have had an opportunity to participate in

the sale process.

1 February 2018 “Ensuring Australians can purchase agricultural land while

foreign investment is geared

toward jobs and growth”,

Treasurer media release,

1 February 2018.

Investment measures relating

to national

security

On 1 February 2018, the Australian government further clarified how it administers the review process of

acquisitions of electricity transmission and distribution

assets, and some generation assets by foreigners: ownership restrictions or conditions may be imposed on a case by case

basis on national security grounds.

1 February 2018 “New conditions on the sale of Australian electricity assets to

foreign investors”, joint media

release, by the Treasurer, the Minister for Home Affairs and

The Minister for Immigration and

Border Protection, 1 February 2018.

On 11 April 2018, the Security of Critical Infrastructure Act

2018 received assent. The Act creates a framework for

managing critical infrastructure by establishing a non-public register of critical infrastructure assets, and by collecting

and updating – via reporting obligations for interest holders

– information on the operation, ownership and control of the assets in the register. The rules are asset-specific and

ownership-neutral and hence apply to domestic and foreign

owners alike. The Act also gives the Minister for Home Affairs a power of “last resort” to direct the operator of a

listed asset in the registry to do or not do a specific thing to

manage an identified national security risk in certain circumstances.

11 April 2018 Security of Critical Infrastructure

Act 2018.

Brazil

Investment policy measures


http://www.revenue.nsw.gov.au/taxes/lts

https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/#/view/act/1997/123/chap2a

https://www.revenuesa.sa.gov.au/taxes-and-duties/foreign-ownership-surcharge

http://sjm.ministers.treasury.gov.au/media-release/006-2018/







https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2018A00029




6


Investment


security


Canada

Investment policy

measures

Effective 21 February 2018, the Canadian Province of

British Columbia increased the additional property transfer

tax on residential property transfers to foreign entities, to 20%, up from 15%, and extended its territorial application to

include the Capital Regional District, the Fraser Valley, the

Central Okanagan and the Nanaimo Regional District. The additional tax that foreigners have to pay was initially

introduced on 2 August 2016 for the Greater Vancouver

Regional District of British Columbia. The tax does not apply to non-residential property, or to trusts that are mutual

fund trusts, real estate investment trusts or specified

investment flow-through trusts.

21 February 2018 “Additional Property Transfer

Tax for Foreign Entities &

Taxable Trustees”, British Columbia government website,

undated;

Budget and Fiscal Plan, Ministry of Finance, 20 February 2018.


to national

security


P.R. China

Investment policy

measures

On 6 December 2017, the National Development and

Reform Commission (NDRC), the Ministry of Commerce, the People's Bank of China, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

and the National Federation of Industry and Commerce

issued a Code of Conduct for Overseas Investment Operations of Private Enterprises. The document sets out

how privately owned Chinese companies may invest abroad.

6 December 2017 “About the release of ‘private

enterprises overseas investment management’ – Notice of Code of

Conduct”, note No 2050 by the

NDRC [2017];

Code of Conduct for Overseas

Investment Operations of Private

Enterprises

A decision of the State Council of 25 December 2017,

published on 9 January 2018, temporarily relaxed certain

restrictions on foreign enterprises in the current 11 Pilot Free Trade Zones (PFTZs). The relaxations concern

enterprises operating in the sectors of printing; aviation

aircraft maintenance, ground services and related matters; certification; entertainment; education; travel agencies;

petrol stations; international shipping; wholesale of certain

grains; design and manufacturing of certain aircrafts; urban rail transport; internet provision and online publishing;

banking; and performing arts. Some of the relaxations had

already been in place in four of the 11 pilot free trade zones, and their applications were extended to the others.

9 January 2018 State Council's Provisional

Adjustment on Free Trade Pilot

Zones Administrative regulations, State Council documents and

State Council Decisions, Guofa

[2017] No. 57.

On 1 March 2018, the National Development and Reform

Commission (NDRC)'s Measures for the Administration of

Outbound Investment by Enterprises (Regulation No.11) came into effect. The rules, which were issued on

26 December 2017 after public consultation between

3 November 2017 and 3 December 2017, govern outbound direct investment by Chinese companies. This is a follow-up

measure to the State Council’s guideline on overseas

investment issued in August 2017. The new rules replace the

Measures for the Administration of Approval and Filing of

Outbound Investment Projects of 2014.

The new rules prohibit investments in countries or regions that have no diplomatic ties with China, zones at war or

under civil disturbance, or are subject to investment

restrictions by international treaties or agreements to which China is a Party. Restrictions also apply for outbound

investment in certain sensitive sectors, notably media

organisations, weapons manufacturing, multi-national water resources exploitation, as well as sectors in which outbound

investment is restricted under China’s laws, regulations and macroeconomic policies, and which include sectors such as

1 March 2018 National Development and

Reform Commission of the

People's Republic of China Regulation No. 11, 26 December

2017.

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/taxes/property-taxes/property-transfer-tax/understand/additional-property-transfer-tax



http://bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/2018/bfp/2018_Budget_and_Fiscal_Plan.pdf

http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/zcfb/zcfbtz/201712/W020171218369246764260.pdf


http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/zcfb/zcfbtz/201712/t20171218_870700.html







http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/2018-01/09/content_5254764.htm





http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/zcfb/zcfbl/201712/W020171226340410103048.pdf

http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/zcfb/zcfbl/201712/W020171226340410103048.pdf

http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/zcfb/zcfbl/201712/t20171226_871560.html




7


hotels, cinemas, entertainment, and sports clubs.

The rules also streamline requirements to inform authorities about overseas investment in non-sensitive sectors below

USD 300 million, and abolish a requirement to submit a

project information report to NDRC prior to competitive bidding on projects of USD 300 million or above.

Finally, the rules strengthen the supervision over outbound

investment projects.

On 28 April 2018, the Administrative Measures for Foreign-Invested Securities Companies came into effect. The major

changes include; (1) allowing foreign investors to be

controlling shareholders in joint-venture (JV) securities companies; (2) gradually expanding the business scope for

JV securities companies; (3) unifying the caps on foreign

ownership in both listed and unlisted securities companies.

28 April 2018 “CSRC Officially Released Administrative Measures for

Foreign-Invested Securities

Companies”, China Securities Regulatory Commission, 29 April

2018;

Administrative Measures for Foreign-invested Securities

Companies, Order No.140, China

Securities Regulatory Commission, 28 April 2018.

Investment


security

On 29 March 2018, the State Council Measures for the

Overseas Transfers of Intellectual Property Rights (trial) entered into effect. Released on 18 March 2018, the

Measures set out review procedures for the transfer of

intellectual property from China abroad for implications for national security and China’s innovation and development

capabilities. Intellectual property for the purpose of the rules

includes patent rights, proprietary rights related to integrated circuit design, computer software copyrights, and rights

related to new plant varieties. Transfers may occur when

technology is exported, in the course of foreign acquisition of Chinese enterprises, or any other technology transactions,

such as involving, for example, changes in the IP ownership

or license. The review is conducted under the responsibility of specified authorities in relation to the assets subject to

transfer. The new rules do not apply for intellectual property

transfers that touch upon national defence, for which specific rules continue to apply. The length of the trial

implementation of the measure is not yet defined.

29 March 2018 Measures for the Overseas

Transfers of Intellectual Property Rights (trial), State Council

release No.19 (2018), 18 March

2018.

France

Investment policy

measures


Investment


security


Germany

Investment policy

measures


Investment


security


India

Investment policy

measures

Throughout the reporting period, several changes to the FDI

regime in India came into effect. These changes, approved

by the Cabinet on 10 January 2018, contained in a press note dated 23 January 2018 and several Notifications of the

Reserve Bank, and effective as of the respective date of

notification in the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA), modify the rules contained in the then current

Consolidated FDI Policy Circular of August 2017 applicable

26 March 2018 Press Note 1 (2018), Department

of Industrial policy and

Promotion, Ministry of Commerce and Industry,

23 January 2018.

“Notification – Foreign Exchange Management (Transfer or Issue of

Security by a Person Resident

http://www.csrc.gov.cn/pub/csrc_en/newsfacts/release/201804/t20180429_337511.html




http://www.csrc.gov.cn/pub/zjhpublic/zjh/201804/t20180428_337509.htm








http://pib.nic.in/PressReleseDetail.aspx?PRID=1516115


http://dipp.nic.in/sites/default/files/pn1_2018.pdf


http://dipp.nic.in/sites/default/files/CFPC_2017_FINAL_RELEASED_28.8.17_0.pdf


http://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/content/pdfs/GNOT26032018_AN.pdf



8


for inward FDI in India for several sectors. Among other

measures, the changes: include permitting FDI in single brand retail trading (SBRT) up to 100% under the automatic

route and defer the local sourcing requirements; further, as

regards the requirement of 30% local sourcing to be done from India by SBRT entities having FDI beyond 51%, such

entities have been permitted to set off their incremental

sourcing of goods from India for global operations during initial 5 years, beginning 1 April of the year of the opening

of first store, against the mandatory sourcing requirement of

30% of purchases from India. Further, for this purpose, incremental sourcing has been defined to mean the increase

in terms of value of such global sourcing from India for that

single brand (in INR terms) in a particular financial year from India over the preceding financial year, by the non-

resident entities undertaking single brand retail trading,

either directly or through their group companies. Other changes include allowing foreign airlines to hold up to 49%

of Air India Ltd. upon government approval, subject to

certain conditions whereas no foreign airline ownership was

previously allowed in Air India Ltd. It has also been

clarified that real estate broker services do not amount to

real estate business and are therefore eligible for 100% FDI under the automatic route and foreign institutional and

portfolio investors to invest in the primary market in power

exchanges, rather than only in the secondary market, as previously.

The changes to the rules also ease certain non-FDI specific

transactions such as: the conversion of non-cash transactions into equity, as such transactions are henceforth allowed

under the automatic route if foreign investment in the sector

is allowed under the automatic route; and relaxed authorisation requirements for foreign investment in

companies whose purpose is to hold assets in other Indian

companies.

The changes also clarify the approval authorities for FDI originating in “countries of concern”, modify the definition of “medical devices for the purpose of the FDI policy; and

specified criteria for the appointment of auditors that carry

out audits of foreign invested Indian companies.

outside India) (Amendment)

Regulations, 2018”, Reserve Bank of India Notification

No.FEMA.20(R) (1)/2018-RB,

26 March 2018.

On 16 April 2018, the Ministry of Finance set minimum foreign capital requirements for financial services entities,

which are not regulated by any financial regulator. The

minimum capital requirements will be USD 20 million for ‘Fund-based activities’ (e.g. Merchant Banking, Under

Writing, Portfolio Management Services) and

USD 2 million for ‘Non-fund based activities’ (e.g. Investment advisory services, Financial Consultancy, Forex

Broking). Since 2016, foreign investment of up to 100% in

this area has been allowed under the government approval route.

16 April 2018 “Minimum Capital Requirements for ‘Other Financial Services’

activities which are unregulated

by any Financial Sector Regulator and FDI is allowed under

Government Route”, Ministry of

Finance press release, 16 April 2018.

Investment

measures relating

to national security


Indonesia


The Regulation of the Indonesian Investment Coordination Board 13/2017, published in December 2017, brought

changes to Indonesia’s regime for processing inward foreign

investment projects. Part of the new rules entered into effect on 2 January 2018, while other parts of the reform will

become effective at the latest on 2 July 2018. In substance,

the changes replace a license requirement for the establishment of a business in Indonesia by a registration

regime.

2 January 2018 Regulation of the Indonesian Investment Coordination Board

13/2017 on Procedure of License

and Investment Facilities, BKPM, 11 December 2017.

On 18 April 2018, Government regulation No.14/2018 on

Foreign Ownership of Insurance Companies came into force. Among others, the regulation sets out which type of

18 April 2018 Government regulation

No.14/2018 on Foreign Ownership of Insurance



https://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/notification/PDFs/20NRBD55D1D00889F43438D76B97340DAE8FF.PDF









https://peraturan.bkpm.go.id/jdih/userfiles/batang/2017._13_PERBKPM_Perizinan_dan_Fasilitas_PM_.pdf






https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Home/Details/74947/pp-no-14-tahun-2018





9


foreign entity can own an insurance company in Indonesia

and which ownership caps apply. Specifically, the regulation caps foreign ownership in a privately owned insurance

company at 80%, while allowing foreigners that currently

exceed this level to retain their stake beyond 80%. Any capital increase in these companies must however respect a

ratio of at least 80:20 between new foreign and domestic

capital.

Companies.


to national

security


Italy

Investment policy

measures



to national

security

On 16 October 2017, changes to the rules that govern Italy’s national security review mechanism came into effect; the

changes were brought into effect by decree-law of

16 October 2017 and confirmed as law without modification by the law of 4 December 2017. The changes, contained in

article 14 of the decreto-legge: close the loopholes existing

in the legislation about sanctions for non-respect of notification requirements; introduces sectors of “high-

technology” in the list of areas indicative of a risk for

security and public order, including in particular critical infrastructure, including storage and handling of data and

financial infrastructure; critical technology such as artificial

intelligence, robotics, semiconductors, dual use technologies, network security and space and nuclear

technology; security of supply of critical resources, and

access and control of critical information. The changes took effect only with respect to procedures that have not

commenced before the date of entry into force.

16 October 2017; 4 December 2017

Decreto-Legge 16 ottobre 2017, n. 148; Legge, 4 dicembre 2017,

n. 172.

Japan

Investment policy

measures


Investment


security


Republic of Korea

Investment policy

measures


Investment


security


Mexico

Investment policy

measures


Investment


security


Russian Federation

Investment policy

measures



http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2017/10/16/17G00166/sg







10


Investment


security


Saudi Arabia

Investment policy

measures

On 26 February 2018, the General Investment Authority of

Saudi Arabia extended the licensing period for foreign

investors to five years, up from one year previously. Licenses can also be renewed upon expiry, and foreign

investors still have the option of holding one-year licences.

26 February 2018 “SAGIA Extends Foreign

Licensing for 5 Renewable

Years”, Saudi Press Agency, 26 February 2018.

Investment


security


South Africa

Investment policy

measures


Investment


security


Turkey

Investment policy

measures


Investment


security


United Kingdom



Investment

measures relating



United States



Investment

measures relating



European Union



https://www.spa.gov.sa/viewstory.php?lang=en&newsid=1727433



11

Methodology for the inventory presented in Annex 1 — Coverage, Definitions and Sources

Reporting period. The reporting period of the present document is from 16 October 2017 to 15 May

2018. An investment measure is counted as falling within the reporting period if new policies were

prepared, announced, adopted, entered into force or applied during the period.

Investment. For the purpose of the inventory presented in Annex 1, international investment is

understood to include only foreign direct investment. Investment policy measures not specific to FDI

are not included in this inventory but shown in Annex 2 of this report.

Investment measure. For the purposes of this annex, investment measures consist of any action that

either: imposes or removes differential treatment of foreign or non-resident investors compared to the

treatment of domestic investors in like situations. Reporting on such policy measures has no legal

effect on the rights and obligations of member states of the WTO, OECD, or UNCTAD.

National security. International investment law, including the OECD investment instruments,

recognises that governments may need to take measures to safeguard essential security interests and

public order. For the purpose of this report, national security related measures are understood as

including policies which relate to national security risks associated with the acquisition, ownership or

control of assets. National security related measures are included irrespective of whether the measure

applies to foreigners only or whether it also covers nationals of the country that takes the measure.

The investment policy community at the OECD and UNCTAD monitors these measures to help

governments adopt policies which are effective in safeguarding national security and to ensure that

they are not disguised protectionism.

Sources of information and verification. The sources of the information presented in this report are:

official notifications made by governments to various OECD processes (e.g. the Freedom of

Investment Roundtable or as required under the OECD investment instruments);

information contained in other international organisations’ reports or otherwise made

available to the OECD and UNCTAD Secretariats;

other publicly available sources: specialised web sites, press clippings etc.

Investment measures included in this report have been verified by the respective G20 members.

12

Annex 2: Recent investment policy measures not specific to FDI (16 October 2017 to 15 May

2018) – Reports on individual economies13


Argentina


Australia


Brazil

Effective for transactions carried out as of 3 March 2018, Brazil increased the rate of

the financial transaction tax (IOF) on the foreign exchange transaction made by a resident that transfers funds abroad from 0.38% to 1.1%.

3 March 2018 Decreto Nº 9.297, 1 March

2018.

Canada


P.R. China

Effective 1 January 2018, China’s State Administration of Foreign Exchange lowered the cap on annual overseas withdrawals to CNY 100 000 (approximately

USD 15000) per person per calendar year, rather than per bank card, as previously.

Individuals who overshoot the cap are banned from any withdrawals abroad in the remainder of the calendar year as well as the following year.

1 January 2018 Notice of the State Administration of Foreign

Exchange on Regulating

Large-scale Foreign Exchange Withdrawals using Bank

Cards, No.29 (2017), SAFE,

30 December 2017.

In a note issued on 6 January 2018 and effective the same day, the People’s Bank of

China provided instructions regarding the implementation of the “Circular of the

State Council Concerning Measures to Promote the Growth of Foreign Trade” (Guofa [2017] No. 39) of 8 August 2017 with respect to yuan-denominated cross-

border transactions. Among others, the note allows the use of yuan for the payment

of overseas salaries and the Chinese carbon trading market.

6 January 2018 “Further improving RMB

cross-border business policies

to facilitate trade and investment”, People’s Bank of

China release 6 January 2018;

Notice of the People's Bank of China on Further Improving

the Cross-Border Renminbi

Business Policy and Promoting Trade and Investment

Facilitation.

On 12 February 2018, changes related to overseas financing by Chinese insurers came into effect. The rules, dated 1 February 2018 and issued by the State

Administration of Foreign Exchange and the China Insurance Regulatory

Commission, set out caps on exposure and reporting requirements for overseas financing operations.

12 February 2018 Notice of the State Administration of Foreign

Exchange and the China

Insurance Regulatory Commission on Regulating the

Relevant Matters of Insurance

Institutions in Conducting Internal Guaranteed Foreign

Loans, Bao Jianfa [2018] 5,

1 February 2018.

On 13 February 2018, new rules issued by the China Banking Regulatory Commission (CBRC) eliminated approval requirements for foreign banks in

overseas wealth management products and portfolio investment funds. Henceforth,

companies only need to report their services to the regulator. The changes follow an announcement in November 2018 that foreign ownership limits in some joint-

13 February 2018 China Banking Regulatory Commission Order No. 3 of

2018, China Banking

Regulatory Commission, 13 February 2018.

13 This inventory has been established by the OECD Secretariat under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the

OECD.

https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2015-2018/2018/Decreto/D9297.htm

http://www.safe.gov.cn/wps/portal/!ut/p/c5/hc1BDoIwFATQs3iCDlhLWbZF21pFCBGRDenCEBIBF8bzW-Ja_bN8mfmkJSGTfw29fw7z5O-kIS3rKFBxGQnobUZhizKVZpdGsEnwK-uUFoYmB4BTDVgqT7lRZfD1n_Zl-cc6ozJ1dDoCdzWHtZtK7c8ujl3y8V_7i-PLCZDczOONPMYGQ9Gv3qmCsZM!/dl3/d3/L2dJQSEvUUt3QS9ZQnZ3LzZfSENEQ01LRzEwODRJQzBJSUpRRUpKSDEySTI!/?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/safe_web_store/safe_web/zcfg/whscyrmbhn/node_zcfg_whjy_store/f598b60043e427369a839a43fc843205






http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/article/ae/ai/201708/20170802627851.shtml

http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/article/ae/ai/201708/20170802627851.shtml

http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2018-01/06/content_5253804.htm




http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2018-01/06/5253804/files/38e29b131cf444c888cbab5bd3d86874.pdf






http://bxjg.circ.gov.cn/web/site0/tab5176/info4099382.htm









http://www.cbrc.gov.cn/chinese/home/docDOC_ReadView/3C40D56C31DB4A9595382D03E36CA78B.html





13


venture firms in the futures, securities and fund markets would be raised form 49%

to 51%; the announcement indicated that full foreign ownership in these sectors would be allowed in several years’ time.

France


Germany


India

On 6 and on 27 April 2018 a series of changes to foreign investment in Indian

government or company debt by foreign portfolio investors came into effect, and further clarifications were issues on 1 May 2018. Under the new rules,

• the issuance of Rupee-denominated bonds is no longer considered for the application of caps that apply to foreign portfolio investors.

• caps for investment by foreign portfolio investors in Government securities, valid

until the end of 2017, were increased.

6 April 2018;

27 April 2018; 1 May 2018

“Investment by Foreign

Portfolio Investors (FPI) in Government Securities -

Medium Term Framework – Review”, RBI/2017-18/150,

A.P.(DIR Series) Circular

No.22, 6 April 2018.

“Investment by Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPI) in

Debt – Review”, RBI/2017-18/168 A.P. (DIR Series)

Circular No.24, 27 April 2018.

“Investment by Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPI) in

Debt – Review”, RBI/2017-

18/170 A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 26, 1 May 2018.

On 4 January 2018, the Reserve Bank of India relaxed rules on the refinancing of

External Commercial Borrowings (ECB) by overseas branches and subsidiaries of

Indian banks and aligned these to the rules applicable to Indian corporates.

Further relaxations of the ECB policies were announced in a Reserve Bank circular

dated 27 April 2018. They include harmonisation of rules for different debt

instruments, relaxations on the liability to equity ratio, expansion of the list of eligible purposes of ECBs, among others.

4 January 2018;

27 April 2018

“Refinancing of External

Commercial Borrowings”,

RBI/2017-18/116 A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No.15,

4 January 2018;

“External Commercial Borrowings (ECB) Policy –

Rationalisation and

Liberalisation”, RBI/2017-18/169 A.P. (DIR Series)

Circular No.25, 27 April 2018.

On 1 April 2018, revised Directions on Hedging of Commodity Price Risk and

Freight Risk in Overseas Markets came into effect. The Directions determine which financial instruments companies can use and which conditions apply to hedge

foreign exchange and commodity price risks.

1 April 2018 “Hedging of Commodity Price

Risk and Freight Risk in Overseas Markets (Reserve

Bank) Directions”, RBI/2017-

18/138 A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No.19, 12 March

2018.

Indonesia


Italy


Japan


https://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/notification/PDFs/150FPID91F710E2F064296AEE2FA3A04416B0D.PDF





https://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/notification/PDFs/NT16864DC2602F2834E29A64D4ADF6D41EA80.PDF



https://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/notification/PDFs/170FPI85A621943FC94443AB5B7373E1F34667.PDF



https://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/notification/PDFs/NT11671225A4473744301BE8398C5166813B0.PDF

https://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/notification/PDFs/NT11671225A4473744301BE8398C5166813B0.PDF

https://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/notification/PDFs/NT1695DAE9A5D479F47B6BCECAC2FB4D6B4E9.PDF




https://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/notification/PDFs/NT138A834B2C3C0344C87AEEE6BB497891621.PDF




14


Republic of Korea


Mexico


Russian Federation


Saudi Arabia

As of 1 January 2018, non-resident foreigners are authorised, under certain conditions, to invest in Saudi Arabia’s “Parallel Market” (Nomu), which was

established on 21 December 2016. The new rules were issued by the Capital Market

Authority (CMA) on 26 October 2017 and relax requirements to qualify as foreign institutional investors.

26 October 2017 “An announcement of the issuance of the CMA Board

Resolution Allowing Non-

Resident Foreign Investors to Invest in the Parallel Market”,

Capital Market Authority,

26 October 2017.

“Guidance note for the investment of Non-Resident

Foreigners in the Parallel Market”, CMA, undated.

South Africa


Turkey


United Kingdom


United States


European Union


Methodology for the inventory presented in Annex 2 — Coverage, Definitions and Sources

Reporting period. The reporting period of the present document is from 16 October 2017 to 15 May

2018. An investment measure is counted as falling within the reporting period if new policies were

prepared, announced, adopted, entered into force or applied during the period.

Investment. For the purpose of the inventory presented in Annex 2, international investment is

understood to include all international capital movements; however, measures specifically concerning

foreign direct investment are not reported in this Annex, but rather in Annex 1 of the present

document.

https://cma.org.sa/en/Market/News/pages/CMA_N_2312.aspx





https://cma.org.sa/en/RulesRegulations/Regulations/Documents/QFI_PM_en.pdf




15

Investment measure. For the purposes of this Annex 2, investment measures consist of any action that

either (i) imposes or removes differential treatment of foreign or non-resident investors compared to

the treatment of domestic investors in like situations; or (ii) imposes or removes restrictions on

international capital movements.

Reporting on international capital movements has no legal effect on the rights and obligations of

member states of the WTO, OECD, or UNCTAD.

Sources of information and verification. The sources of the information presented in this report are:

official notifications made by governments to various OECD processes (e.g. the Freedom of

Investment Roundtable or as required under the OECD investment instruments);

information contained in other international organisations’ reports or otherwise made

available to the OECD Secretariat;

other publicly available sources: specialised web sites, press clippings etc.

Investment measures included in this report have been verified by the respective G20 members.

16

Annex 3: G20 Members’ International Investment Agreements14

BITs Other IIAs

Total IIAs

as of

15 May

2018

Concluded

between

16 October

2017 and

15 May

2018

Effectively

terminated

between

16 October

2017 and

15 May

2018

As of

15 May

2018

Concluded

between

16 October

2017 and

15 May 2018

Effectively

terminated

between

16 October

2017 and

15 May

2018

As of

15 May

2018

Argentina 1 55 1 18 73

Australia 17 2 20 37

Brazil 2 21 18 39

Canada 32 1 21 53

China 128 22 150

France 104 68 172

Germany 133 68 201

India 61 13 74

Indonesia 42 2 17 59

Italy 84 67 151

Japan 28 1 19 47

Republic of Korea 94 1 20 114

Mexico 32 1 16 48

Russian Federation 79 6 85

Saudi Arabia 24 13 37

South Africa 39 11 50

Turkey 8 106 21 127

United Kingdom 106 68 174

United States 46 68 114

European Union 1 67 67

Source: UNCTAD’s IIA Navigator (http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/IIA).

—

14 The total number of IIAs has been revised as a result of retroactive adjustments to UNCTAD’s IIA Navigator

(http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/IIA).

http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/IIA

http://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/IIA